Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
JANUARY 2005
I hereby certify that the work embodied in this
thesis is the result of original research and has
not been submitted for a higher degree to any
other University or Institution.
(Signed): ____________________________
James Hinkley
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The study described in this thesis was carried out in the Cooperative Centre for Coal in
Sustainable Development (CCSD) at the University of Newcastle. I wish to thank the
CCSD for their funding of the project, and the University for provision of a
postgraduate research scholarship.
I would also like to thank Dr John Carras from CSIRO Energy Technology for always
taking an interest in the project and his significant contributions while we were
developing the project scope. I am also indebted to many other CSIRO personnel,
notably Dr Brendan Halliburton for his experimental expertise and Drs Moetaz Attala
and Denys Angove for their helpful suggestions. Dr Bill Physick and Peter Hurley of
CSIRO DAR were also more than helpful with the TAPM modelling.
To my fellow fine particle postgraduate student Bart Buhre, many thanks for your
intellectual and social interaction, which has helped make returning to University so
enjoyable and rewarding. Thanks also to Joe Auberger, exchange student from Vienna,
for your contributions to the CCSD in general and my experiences in particular.
Thanks also to Dave Phelan, from the EM Unit of the University of Newcastle, for his
instruction and advice on the SEM analysis, which forms a significant part of this work,
and to Gary Weber, also of the UNEMU, who was a great help with the TEM imaging.
I am also grateful to Katie Levick, at the EMU at the University of New South Wales,
for a very productive and enjoyable session on the TEM at UNSW. I am also thankful
for the gentle guidance and assistance provided by a couple of friendly mathematicians
iii
at the University of Newcastle, Mr Kim Colyvas and Mr Frank Tuyl, who helped point
me through the statistical jungle to find information from mere data.
I wish to also thank the staff of the Discipline of Chemical Engineering University of
Newcastle for their help and support, particularly Robin D’Ombrain for building my
conditional power supply, Con Safouris, Gillian Hensman, John Wanders, Neil Gardner,
Steve “Richo” Richardson, Jenny Martin and Jane Hamson. And of course Leonie
Fuller who was so helpful in printing out my final drafts and my final document. And
particular thanks to Chris Wensrich, who pulled me out of a computational hole by
allowing me to use his super hyper threaded multi-chip P4 to get my TAPM modelling
completed before my scholarship ran out!
I would also like to express my sincere thanks to all at ANSTO, and especially Dr Ivo
Orlic, Eduardo Stelcer and Dr David Cohen for their dedication to work, enthusiasm
and friendly manner.
This project was reliant on support from power generators, and I would like to thank
Malcolm Rothe from Macquarie Generation, and Nino di Falco and fellow Piled high
and Deep student Mick Jensen of Delta Electricity for their open supply of historical
data as well as access to existing monitoring sites.
And finally, special thanks to my wife Tracey for your encouragement and support
throughout my PhD project. It’s been a rich and rewarding experience.
iv
ABSTRACT
A comprehensive study has been conducted to assess the contribution of emissions from
coal fired power stations to ambient particles near two large stations in the Hunter
Valley region in New South Wales, Australia. Fine particles are an active area of
research with many studies revealing statistical associations between concentrations of
atmospheric ambient particles and mortality and other health impacts. A review of the
wide body of literature in this area concluded that, while coal fired power stations were
a significant anthropogenic source of fine particles, little information was available on
the contribution that these emissions make to ambient particles. Key characteristics of
interest identified were the contribution that emissions make to fine particulate mass,
aerosol chemistry and ultrafine particles.
Air pollution modelling using a commercial package (The Air Pollution Model or
TAPM) was also used to estimate the maximum contributions of power station
particulate emissions to the ambient aerosol and to study dispersion patterns. This was
complemented by a review of historical data; both sets of information sources indicated
that events were episodic and related to the breakdown of overnight atmospheric
stability due to solar heating of the ground.
Power station primary particulate emissions were found to make only a minor
contribution to ambient particulate mass, with episodic events of comparatively minor
significance. Maximum contributions to PM10 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than 10 µm) predicted by TAPM at the Ravensworth site were 2.3 µg m-3.
Results from the Burkard spore sampler were consistent and indicated a maximum
v
estimated contribution from particulate emissions between 1 and 10 µm of 0.4 µg m-3.
The aerosol at the site was dominated by other sources such as windblown dust.
However, it was found during analysis of the cascade impactor results that power
station emissions also contributed significantly to the mass of particles less than 1 µm,
and that this mass was potentially more significant than primary particulate emissions.
Six size fractions from the cascade impactor ranging from 2.5 µm to less than 0.3 µm
were analysed using Ion Beam Analysis to provide high sensitivity analysis over a wide
elemental suite. The resulting elemental mass concentration data was interpreted using
factor analysis to extract 5 sources, including soil, salt, diesel and an industrial source.
A coal fired power station source was also extracted, concentrated primarily in the size
fraction less than 0.3 µm, and associated with the elements sulphur, chlorine, chromium,
nickel and copper. The average mass contribution of the power station component to
the samples collected at an average sulphur dioxide concentration of 46 ppb was 2.0 µg
m-3, approximately three times the estimated contribution of primary particulate
emissions based on pro rata dilution of the stack emissions. Note that these impacts are
the direct impact of the plume, and do not include background contributions of prior
emissions to secondary particulates.
Transmission Electron Microscopy studies of the fine particles confirmed the presence
of significant quantities of particles which were unstable under the electron beam,
consistent with literature descriptions of sulphate species. The appearance and nature of
the residues of these sublimated particles indicated varying neutralisation and water
association. Calculations based on source emission data suggested that this material
was probably formed from primary emissions of sulphuric acid due to the presence of
SO3 in the power station stack gases rather than through gas to particle conversion.
While emissions are therefore expected to have only a minor and intermittent
contribution to the ambient aerosol even relatively close to the power stations, some
uncertainty remains in the contribution of emissions to the minus 0.3 µm size fraction.
Additional characterisation work is recommended to clarify the extent, composition and
nature of this material and understand the relevant atmospheric chemistry in terms of
the rate of conversion to sulphuric acid, ammonium sulphate and other sulphate species.
Larger sample masses would reduce analysis uncertainties and permit investigation of
vi
the indicated but statistically unproven association of transition metals with the fine
particulate mass derived from power station emissions.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................iii
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...............................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................xiii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ xv
1 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY OBJECTIVES ................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................ 3
1.3 Thesis Outline ................................................................................................. 3
2 LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................... 4
2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Health Studies and Air Quality Legislation .................................................... 4
2.2.1 Fine Particles and Human Health .......................................................... 4
2.2.2 Air Quality Legislation ......................................................................... 6
2.3 Characteristics of Airborne Particulates.......................................................... 8
2.3.1 Sources of Airborne Particulates ........................................................... 8
2.3.2 Characteristics of Different Sources ................................................... 10
2.3.3 Previous Studies on Aerosol Composition.......................................... 12
2.4 Characteristics of Power Station Emissions.................................................. 14
2.4.1 Ash Formation Mechanisms ............................................................... 15
2.4.2 Impact of Emission Control Systems .................................................. 18
2.4.3 Characteristics of Emitted Particulates ............................................... 21
2.5 Dispersion of Emissions from Point Sources ................................................ 25
2.5.1 Atmospheric Dispersion of Industrial Plumes .................................... 25
2.6 Previous Studies of the Significance of Power Station Emissions ............... 27
2.6.1 International Studies............................................................................ 27
2.6.2 Deposition Studies Using Biomonitors ............................................... 30
2.6.3 Aerosol Studies Using Filter Samples................................................. 31
2.6.4 Aerosol Studies Using Cascade Impactors ......................................... 32
2.6.5 Wet Deposition Studies ....................................................................... 33
2.6.6 Summary of International Findings .................................................... 33
2.6.7 Australian Studies ............................................................................... 34
viii
2.7 Overview of Hunter Valley and Previous Studies ........................................ 36
2.7.1 Meteorology of the Hunter Valley ...................................................... 37
2.7.2 Hunter Valley Studies – Sulphur Dioxide & Acid Rain ..................... 38
2.7.3 Hunter Valley Studies – Airborne Dust .............................................. 39
2.8 Gaps in Knowledge and Thesis Objectives ................................................... 41
2.8.1 Summary of Literature Review ........................................................... 41
2.8.2 Gaps in Knowledge ............................................................................. 42
3 EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES................................... 44
3.1 Objectives & Experimental Components ...................................................... 44
3.2 Review and Selection of Sampling Techniques ............................................ 44
3.2.1 Determination of Contribution to Total Particulate Mass ................... 44
3.2.2 Determination of Contribution to Aerosol Chemistry ........................ 49
3.2.3 Determination of Contribution to Ultrafines ....................................... 53
3.3 Project Overview........................................................................................... 55
3.4 Selection of Study Area ................................................................................ 55
3.5 Sampling with Burkard Spore Sampler ........................................................ 57
3.5.1 Details of Spore Sampler Set-up ......................................................... 57
3.5.2 Details of Field Sampling ................................................................... 58
3.5.3 Predicted Cut Point of Spore Sampler ................................................ 60
3.5.4 Analysis of Burkard Spore Sampler Tapes ......................................... 61
3.5.5 EDX Analysis ..................................................................................... 64
3.5.6 Selection of Magnification for Imaging .............................................. 65
3.5.7 Determination of Fly Ash Mass Loading ............................................ 66
3.5.8 Sources of Error and Uncertainty for Mass Concentrations ............... 67
3.5.9 Image Analysis Details ....................................................................... 67
3.5.10 Impact of Flowrate Variations ............................................................ 69
3.5.11 Estimation of Uncertainty for Mass Concentrations (Counting
Statistics) ............................................................................................ 71
3.6 Cascade Impactor and IBA Analysis ............................................................ 71
3.6.1 Cascade Impactor Details and Predicted Cut-points ........................... 71
3.6.2 Calibration of Cascade Impactor......................................................... 72
3.6.3 Conditional Sampling Methodology ................................................... 73
3.6.4 Ion Beam Analysis of Cascade Impactor Samples ............................. 74
3.7 Nanometer Aerosol Sampler ......................................................................... 76
ix
3.7.1 Collection of Samples from Ambient Air at Ravensworth ................. 76
4 HISTORICAL DATA & TAPM MODELLING ................................................... 79
4.1 Analysis of Historical Data ........................................................................... 79
4.1.1 Validity of SO2 as Plume Indicator ..................................................... 79
4.1.2 Atmospheric Stability ......................................................................... 80
4.1.3 Observed Dilution of Plume................................................................ 81
4.1.4 Correlation of SO2 and PM10 .............................................................. 82
4.1.5 Concentrations at Ravensworth Compared to Other Sites .................. 84
4.1.6 Summary of Analysis of Historical Data ............................................ 84
4.2 TAPM Modelling .......................................................................................... 85
4.2.1 Goals of Model Simulations ............................................................... 85
4.2.2 Model Assumptions and Input Details ................................................ 85
4.2.3 TAPM Results: Sulphur Dioxide GLC’s ............................................ 87
4.2.4 TAPM Results: Particulate Matter ...................................................... 93
4.2.5 Summary ............................................................................................. 95
5 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 96
5.1 Analysis of Burkard 7-Day Spore Sampler Tapes ........................................ 96
5.1.1 Assessment of Spore Sampler: Deposition Patterns ........................... 96
5.1.2 Identification of Particulates from Different Sources ......................... 98
5.1.3 Selection of Events for Mass Assessments ....................................... 102
5.1.4 Character of Fly Ash Identified in Ravensworth Samples ................ 102
5.1.5 Confirmation of SO2 as Indicator...................................................... 106
5.1.6 Sensitivity Analysis: Impact of Voltage Drop and Flowrate ............ 107
5.1.7 Mass Concentrations and Counting Uncertainties ............................ 110
5.1.8 Possible Confounding by Ravensworth Ash Disposal ...................... 112
5.1.9 Summary of Burkard Results ............................................................ 113
5.2 Results of Cascade Impactor Sampling....................................................... 114
5.2.1 Calibration of Cascade Impactor Cutpoints ...................................... 114
5.2.2 SO2 Concentrations During High SO2 Campaigns ........................... 116
5.2.3 Factor Analysis of IBA Chemistry Results ....................................... 116
5.2.4 Summary of Cascade Impactor Results ............................................ 130
5.3 Results from Nanometer Aerosol Sampler (NAS) ...................................... 132
5.3.1 Diesel Samples .................................................................................. 132
5.3.2 Character of Particles Collected Under Low SO2 Conditions .......... 136
x
5.3.3 Character of Particles Collected Under High SO2 Conditions .......... 138
5.3.4 Summary of TEM Investigations of NAS Samples .......................... 143
6 INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT OF RESULTS ................................................. 145
6.1 Contribution of Emissions to Particulate Mass ........................................... 145
6.1.1 Expectations from Historical Monitoring Data and Air Pollution
Modelling.......................................................................................... 145
6.1.2 Measurements of “Coarse” Primary Particulate Contributions ........ 146
6.1.3 Measurements of the Contribution to Fine (Submicron) Particulate
Matter................................................................................................ 146
6.1.4 Contribution of Power Station Acid Emissions and Sulphur Dioxide
Oxidation .......................................................................................... 148
6.2 Contribution of Emissions to Aerosol Chemistry ....................................... 149
6.3 Contribution of Power Station Emissions to Ultrafine Particulates ............ 150
6.4 Summary of Results .................................................................................... 151
6.4.1 Assessing Impacts on Nearby Urban Areas ...................................... 152
7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................... 153
7.1 Conclusions from Literature Review .......................................................... 153
7.2 Sampling Program and Methodology ......................................................... 154
7.2.1 Study Site Selection .......................................................................... 154
7.2.2 Conclusions from Historical Data and Air Pollution Modelling ...... 154
7.2.3 Experimental Program ...................................................................... 155
7.3 Summary of Results .................................................................................... 156
7.3.1 Burkard Spore Sampler ..................................................................... 156
7.3.2 Cascade Impactor .............................................................................. 156
7.3.3 Nanometer Aerosol Sampler (NAS) ................................................. 157
7.4 Integrated Assessment of Results ............................................................... 157
7.4.1 Contribution of Particulate Emissions to Mass ................................. 157
7.4.2 Contribution to Aerosol Chemistry ................................................... 158
7.4.3 Contribution to Ultrafine Particles (minus 0.4 µm) .......................... 159
7.5 Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research ........................... 159
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 161
Appendix A: Calibration of Burkard Flow Tube .......................................................... 174
Appendix B: Predicted Cutpoint of Spore Sampler ...................................................... 175
Appendix C: Predicted Cutpoints of Cascade Impactor ............................................... 177
xi
Appendix D: Correlation of PM10 with SO2 ................................................................. 179
Appendix E: TAPM Simulation Details ....................................................................... 181
Appendix F: Cascade Impactor – Associated Errors .................................................... 184
Appendix G: Factor Analysis ........................................................................................ 185
Appendix H: t-Tests ...................................................................................................... 192
Appendix I: Quantitative Source Assessment ............................................................... 197
Appendix J: Table of X-Ray Emission Energies (keV) ................................................ 203
xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1:Toxicological hypotheses for impacts of airborne particulate matter on human
health (Lighty et al., 2000). ............................................................................. 6
Table 2-2: Selected international and Australian ambient air quality standards ............... 7
Table 2-3: Global Sources of Aerosol Particles in the Atmosphere (IPCC, 1996) ........... 8
Table 2-4: Calculated 1990 Worldwide Anthropogenic PM10 Emissions by Major
Source Category (Wolf and Hidy, 1997) ........................................................ 9
Table 2-5: Sources and Properties of Fine and Coarse Mode Particles (Wilson and Suh,
1997) ............................................................................................................. 11
Table 2-6: Particle Size and Morphology of Emitted Particulates .................................. 21
Table 2-7: Morphology of Emitted Particulates as a Function of Particle Size (Fisher et
al., 1978)........................................................................................................ 23
Table 2-8: Global Sulphur Emissions from Natural and Anthropogenic Sources MtS y-1
(Bates et al., 1992) ........................................................................................ 34
Table 2-9: Annual emissions (kg) from Bayswater and Liddell Power Stations for
2002/2003 reporting year (NPI, 2003) .......................................................... 36
Table 2-10: Upper Hunter SO2 Emission Studies ........................................................... 38
Table 3-1: Standard methods for determining airborne particulate mass. ...................... 44
Table 3-2: Potential methodologies for determining aerosol chemistry. ........................ 49
Table 3-3: Commonly used wet chemical analytical methods (Christian and O'Reilly,
1986; Bettinelli et al., 1998).......................................................................... 50
Table 3-4: Accelerator Based Techniques Applied to Particle Analysis ........................ 51
Table 3-5: Potential methodologies for assessing ultrafine particulates. ........................ 54
Table 3-6: Details of Burkard Spore Sampler Deployment ............................................ 58
Table 3-7: Details of sampling campaigns with cascade impactor at Ravensworth: ...... 73
Table 3-8: Equilibrium distribution of charges on aerosol particles (TSI, 2003) ........... 76
Table 4-1: 10 minute SO2 concentration statistics and estimated dilution factors. ......... 81
Table 4-2: Relative SO2 concentrations at Ravensworth and nearby urban areas
predicted by TAPM (2002/2003) .................................................................. 93
Table 4-3: Scaling factors for various SO2 concentration parameters to allow
Ravensworth results to be extrapolated to nearby urban areas. .................... 93
Table 4-4: Descriptive statistics for hourly concentrations predicted by TAPM
(unscaled) for Ravensworth site and SO2 monitoring data for comparison. . 94
xiii
Table 5-1: Key particle categories identified using morphology and spectral data. ..... 100
Table 5-2: Individual SO2 events analysed by SEM: .................................................... 102
Table 5-3: Correction for reduced volume sampled due to varying flowrates: ............ 108
Table 5-4: Cases used to examine sensitivity of mass determinations to variation in d50
and collection efficiency ............................................................................. 109
Table 5-5: Wind speed and direction during events selected for analysis (Burkard
sampler tapes): ............................................................................................ 113
Table 5-6: Calculated cut sizes for particles of different densities ............................... 116
Table 5-7: Average SO2 concentrations during high SO2 sampling campaigns ........... 116
Table 5-8: Overview of Data Integrity – all stages (“High Integrity” data has an error of
less than 25%, “Lower Confidence” from 25-100%) ................................. 118
Table 5-9: Results of Principal Component Analysis with varimax rotation on the
validated IBA cascade impactor results. ..................................................... 120
Table 5-10: Independent samples t-test comparing means of overall high and low SO2
data sets (summarised from Appendix H)................................................... 126
Table 5-11: Summary of independent samples t-tests comparing means of high and low
SO2 data sets for individual stages. Significance is likelihood of observed
enrichment being due to random error with means equal. .......................... 127
Table 5-12: Chemical profiles for components derived using PCA . ........................... 129
Table 5-13: Summary of NAS campaigns and quality of sample loading in terms of
suitability for TEM assessment. .................................................................. 132
Table 5-14: Approximate distribution of particle types in low SO2 sample (N3) ........ 137
Table 5-15: Approximate distribution of particles in high SO2 sample (R5) ............... 142
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Idealised mass distribution of particle sizes found in the atmosphere
(Watson and Chow, 1994)............................................................................. 10
Figure 3-2: Mass distribution of urban aerosol in four Australian cities. Taken from
(Ayers et al., 1999b) ...................................................................................... 12
Figure 3-3: Breakdown of PM2.5 for Muswellbrook, 2002/2003 (MSC, 2003) .............. 14
Figure 3-4: Mechanisms of Fly ash Formation (Buhre et al., 2001) ............................... 16
Figure 3-5: Particle size dependent collection efficiency for fabric filter baghouse and
ESP (taken from (McElroy et al., 1982)) ...................................................... 20
Figure 3-6: Cumulative particle size distribution of emissions for dry bottom boilers
burning pulverised bituminous and sub-bituminous coal with various
controls. Data sourced from US EPA Table 1.1-6 (1995). .......................... 20
Figure 4-1: Burkard Spore Sampler(Burkard, 2000) ...................................................... 46
Figure 4-2: Diagrammatic representation of project scope. ............................................ 55
Figure 4-3: Satellite image of study area. ....................................................................... 57
Figure 4-4: Location of Burkard Spore sampler on gas shed roof at Ravensworth. ....... 60
Figure 4-5: Low magnification SEM image of tape exposed at Ravensworth site......... 62
Figure 4-6:SE (left) and BSE images of large coal and silica particles. ......................... 63
Figure 4-7: Typical fly ash EDX Spectrum with elemental peaks labelled. Horizontal
axis is the energy of the emitted electrons (characteristic for particular orbital
transitions), while the vertical axis is the count rate. .................................... 64
Figure 4-8: Particle size distributions for all particles counted for images acquired at
two magnifications, 500x and 2000x. Distributions are expressed as the
number of particles per mm2 reporting to a log series of size bins. .............. 65
Figure 4-9: Effect of lower limit of thresholding on number of objects found by Image
Tool “Find Objects” function. ....................................................................... 69
Figure 4-10: Photograph of IBA stick showing reference materials (left) and samples
from cascade impactor (smaller holders on right)......................................... 75
Figure 4-11: Typical PIXE spectrum showing peaks for various elements. ................... 75
Figure 4-12: NAS set-up showing cascade impactor and neutraliser on inlet. ............... 77
Figure 5-1: Relationship between SO2 and NOx at Ravensworth. .................................. 79
Figure 5-2: Average daily variation of SO2 concentration.............................................. 80
xv
Figure 5-3: 10 minute SO2 data for sample 3-day period showing nature of individual
events............................................................................................................. 81
Figure 5-4. Potential correlation between daily average SO2 concentration and
corresponding daily gravimetric PM10 concentration. .................................. 82
Figure 5-5: Cumulative 10 minute SO2 data from available monitoring sites (2001/2002
monitoring year). ........................................................................................... 84
Figure 5-6: Overview of study area showing location of monitoring site, power station
stacks and urban areas Muswellbrook and Singleton in salmon. .................. 87
Figure 5-7: Average monthly SO2 concentrations for the inner grid (40 km x 40 km) for
period July 2002 to June 2003. ..................................................................... 88
Figure 5-8: Sample plots of second highest SO2 concentration over inner grid area ..... 89
Figure 5-9: Comparison of TAPM predictions with previous hour averages of 10 minute
SO2 monitoring data (see text for details). .................................................... 91
Figure 5-10: Scatter plots comparing TAPM predictions of hourly SO2 concentrations
at Ravensworth monitoring site with hourly averages of monitoring data for
two periods of one month.............................................................................. 91
Figure 5-11: Frequency distribution of hourly average SO2 concentrations for TAPM
predictions and monitoring data (2002/2003). .............................................. 92
Figure 5-12: TAPM predictions of hourly concentrations of TSP from power station
primary emissions in µg m-3. ......................................................................... 94
Figure 6-1: Schematic showing location of the 5 images (not to scale) used for mass
determinations; grey area indicates slot dimensions (14x0.5 mm). .............. 96
Figure 6-2: Size distributions of particles at different positions across tape. Plots (a) and
(c) are normalised number distributions; plots (b) and (d) are raw particle
number data (X-co-ordinate refers to stage position in microns) ................. 97
Figure 6-3: Image of “puff” event showing extent of impaction area. ........................... 98
Figure 6-4: SEM image of a high particulate matter event. ............................................ 99
Figure 6-5: SEM images of several unusually large crystalline particles. .................... 100
Figure 6-6: Fly ash roundness values from Image Tool as a function of particle size. 104
Figure 6-7: Number and mass distributions of fly ash particles identified from Burkard
Spore sampler tapes at Ravensworth........................................................... 105
Figure 6-8: Average brightness of single fly ash particles as a function of size........... 105
Figure 6-9: Validity of SO2 as an Indicator. ................................................................. 106
Figure 6-10: Reduced collection efficiency data (after Rubow et al, 1987) ................. 108
xvi
Figure 6-11: Sensitivity analysis of mass estimates to √St50 and flowrate. .................. 110
Figure 6-12: Estimated mass concentration and number of fly ash particles observed.
..................................................................................................................... 111
Figure 6-13: Agglomerate containing fly ash suspected to be derived from ash
emplacement as Ravensworth Void. ........................................................... 112
Figure 6-14: Results of calibration of cascade impactor stages 1 to 3 using sebacic acid
ester droplets. .............................................................................................. 115
Figure 6-15: Contribution of identified components to different particle sizes. ........... 122
Figure 6-16: Predictive power of the six components derived from rotated PCA solution
to explain total measured mass concentrations. .......................................... 128
Figure 6-17: Images from diesel exhaust samples T1 and T3. ..................................... 133
Figure 6-18: EDX spectra from UNSW TEM of soot particles from sample T1 –
horizontal axis is the energy of the detected X-rays, vertical axis is total
counts. ......................................................................................................... 135
Figure 6-19: Sample images from TEM analysis of low SO2 sample N3. ................... 136
Figure 6-20: Sample images from TEM analysis of high SO2 sample R5.................... 139
Figure 6-21: EDX spectra from UNSW TEM of residues from unstable particles –
horizontal axis is the energy of the detected X-rays, vertical axis is total
counts. ......................................................................................................... 141
xvii
1 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY OBJECTIVES
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Despite significant improvements in emissions controls, air pollution poses a major risk
to human health even today. It has been estimated that as many as 2,800,000 people die
annually from exposure to high concentrations of suspended particles in the indoor
environment, mainly associated with domestic cooking and heating with poor
ventilation in developing countries (WHO, 1999). Ambient air quality is also a
significant problem, with the excess mortality due to suspended particles and sulphur
dioxide in ambient air estimated at around 500,000 (WHO, 1999).
These estimates are based on correlations between health statistics and measured
ambient concentrations of pollutants. Fine airborne particulate matter has been linked
with disease and mortality in many studies. One of the earliest and best known studies
was the “Six Cities Study” (Dockery et al., 1993), which showed statistically significant
increases in mortality with increasing airborne fine particulate mass. Recent reviews of
available data have suggested that particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than
2.5 µm (PM2.5) have the most acute impacts (WHO, 2003). The European Union and
the United States are currently reviewing proposals to tighten PM2.5 air quality
guidelines (USEPA, 2003b; CAFE, 2004).
These findings have focussed attention on the various sources that contribute fine
particles to the atmosphere. Particles can be grouped into “primary” particles formed at
source, and “secondary” particles formed by transformation of gaseous pollutants in the
atmosphere e.g. ammonium sulphate. Primary particles are generally formed by either
combustion or mechanical processes. Mechanical processes – for example erosion,
agriculture and mining - tend to produce coarser particles than combustion processes
(Wilson and Suh, 1997).
Combustion aerosols have received particular attention as they are generally very fine:
80-90% of the particulate matter (PM) mass emitted from agricultural burning, wood
stoves, diesel trucks and crude oil combustion is less than one micrometer in diameter
(Lighty et al., 2000). Limited data is available for coal-fired power station emissions,
1
but it would appear that primary particulate emissions are coarser than for other
combustion processes (McElroy et al., 1982; Meij et al., 1985); this will be discussed in
greater detail in the literature review. One of the key differences is that emissions from
most combustion processes are unburnt carbon whereas primary emissions from power
generation are largely particles derived from the mineral matter in the coal which have
evaded emission control devices (Meij et al., 1985).
In NSW, anthropogenic PM10 emissions are dominated by fugitive emissions from coal
mining, with coal fired electricity generation accounting for 8-12% of the total in recent
years (NPI, 2002). Emissions from coal fired power stations are therefore potentially
significant contributors to ambient particulate matter. While the contribution of power
stations to the emission inventory can be readily estimated, the significance in terms of
ambient particulate matter is comparatively poorly understood.
The Upper Hunter Valley was selected as the preferred location for a case study to
assess the contribution of power station emissions to ambient particulate matter. The
area has two large, modern coal fired power stations which supply approximately 40%
of the electricity for the state of New South Wales (DUAP, 1997). These stations are
both equipped with current best practice emission control devices in the form of fabric
filters (Heeley, 2001). Several previous studies have considered other pollutants in the
area such as fugitive dust from mining and sulphur dioxide, and one study was found
when one of these stations was equipped with less efficient electrostatic precipitators
(ESPs) for emission control.
2
1.2 OBJECTIVES
This study assesses the contribution of power station particulate emissions to ambient
particulate matter, in an Australian context. The study was based on sampling in the
Upper Hunter Valley, with dispersion modelling used to validate the sampling site and
extrapolate the results to nearby urban areas of interest.
3
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a review of the current state of knowledge regarding the
contribution of power station emissions to atmospheric fine particles. Six main areas
will be discussed to both provide sufficient background for the issue and review the
available literature in the specific area. These are:
• Health studies and air quality legislation;
• Characteristics of airborne particulate matter – sources, chemistry, size
• Characteristics of power station emissions – formation, chemistry, size
• Dispersion of emissions from point sources
• Previous studies on the significance of power station emissions
• Overview of Upper Hunter Valley – sources, previous studies
This will be followed by a summary of the gaps in knowledge and the refined thesis
objectives.
While epidemiological studies have demonstrated correlations between disease and the
amount of particulate matter in the air, understanding of the toxicology and even
conclusive causality remain incomplete (Smith and Sloss, 1998). However, some
studies have concluded that the finer particles are more significant in terms of health
effects – mortality in six US cities was found to be more strongly correlated with PM2.5
than PM10 (Schwartz et al., 1996). Recent appraisal of available data by a WHO
working group concluded that “fine particles (commonly measured as PM2.5) are
strongly associated with mortality and other endpoints such as hospitalization for
cardio-pulmonary disease” although it was also noted that a “smaller body of evidence
suggests that coarse mass (particles between 2.5 and 10 µm) also has some effects on
health.” (WHO, 2003)
The increased risks associated with PM2.5 are believed to be a result of the finer
particles being more able to elude the body’s protection mechanisms and penetrate into
the lungs. Most particles larger than10µm and 60-80% of 5-10µm are trapped in the
nose and upper respiratory tract and are expelled naturally from the body (Smith and
Sloss, 1998). About 60% of particles less than 0.1µm are deposited in the lung, where
they accumulate because the lung is unable to clean itself. What happens to particles
from there is the subject of much debate and research. A recent review of selected data
on the major and minor component composition of PM2.5 and PM10 concluded that there
was “little support for the idea that any single major or trace component of the
particulate matter is responsible for the adverse effects” (Harrison and Yin, 2000). The
authors also concluded “there are, if anything, too many plausible mechanisms and too
little established fact”.
5
Lighty et al. (2000) note that the “epidemiology and toxicology of ambient PM is an
active area of research”. They summarised the demonstrated and suspected “bad
actors” in atmospheric particulate matter into 11 categories, as shown in Table 2-1
(Lighty et al., 2000). These range from measures of overall mass concentrations to
particular compounds and species.
1. PM Mass Concentration. The initial epidemiologic studies correlated effects with mass as
measured by ambient monitoring procedures.
2. PM Particle Size / Surface Area. Stronger associations are seen with fine particle mass, and the
body interacts with the surface of an insoluble particle, not the volume.
3. Ultrafine PM. Particles smaller than 0.1 µm dominate the total number of particles in urban aerosols.
Ultrafine particles are deposited deep in the lung by diffusion.
4. Metals. Transition metals including Fe, V, Cu and Ni can act as catalysts in the formation of reactive
oxygen species (ROS) or activate biochemical processes.
+
5. Acids. Inhalation studies have shown toxic responses that are associated with the amount of H
delivered to respiratory surfaces.
6. Organic Compounds. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals associated with particles can act
as irritants/allergens. Many aromatic compounds are carcinogenic.
7. Biogenic Particles. Pollen, spores and proteins are known allergens. Ambient PM also includes
viable bacteria and viruses, as well as other biologically generated compounds.
8. Salt and Secondary Aerosols. Soluble salts formed by ocean spray and by gas-to-particle
conversion are thought relatively benign, although implicated indirectly by mass.
9. Peroxides. Ambient peroxides associated with particles may be transported into the lung and may
cause oxidant injury.
10. Soot. Carbon black has been shown in laboratory studies to cause tissue irritation and promote
toxic formation. Soot particles also act as carriers for organic compounds.
11. Cofactors. The combination of two or more pollutants may cause greater or different effects than
the individual pollutants acting separately.
Given the uncertainty over the “bad actors” in fine particulate matter, any study into the
contribution of power station emissions must endeavour to provide information about as
many of these potential hypotheses as possible. The most pertinent potential “bad
actors” from the above table fall into three main categories:
• airborne particulate mass;
• airborne particulate chemistry; and
• particle size distribution, particularly the ultrafine component.
Table 2-2: Selected international and Australian ambient air quality standards.
In Australia, PM10 standards were set as late as 1998: a 10-year goal to exceed a daily
average of 50 µg m-3 no more than 5 times per year (NEPC, 1998). Australia has also
undertaken other initiatives to improve air quality including the following:
7
• A network of 24 PM2.5 monitors was established in the Newcastle, Sydney and
Wollongong regions in 1994 with funding from the Energy Development
Research Council. Samples from this network continue to be collected under the
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation’s (ANSTO) Aerosol
Sampling Program, providing data for chemical analysis of the aerosol and
source apportionment (Cohen et al., 1996)
• The Commonwealth government through Environment Australia now requires
industries to predict and or measure and report criteria pollutants including
PM10. This information is held in an on-line database: the National Pollutant
Inventory (NPI), http://www.environment.gov.au/epg/npi/database/index.html
• Load based licensing was introduced in some states from 1 July 1999, with
license fees based on both fixed and load based components. In NSW, the LBL
scheme for coal fired power generation is based on the load of “fine
particulates” (PM10) as well as 11 other pollutants (NSWEPA, 2001).
Table 2-3: Global Sources of Aerosol Particles in the Atmosphere (IPCC, 1996).
8
It is interesting to note the differences between the airborne burden and the emission
rates, which is indicative of the residence time of particles from the different sources.
Sea salt, for instance, while making up 38% of the flux accounts for only 12% of the
burden, indicating a relatively brief residence time. Residence time will be determined
to a large extent by the settling velocity, which is in turn dependent on particle size. On
the other hand, anthropogenic emissions are finer and remain in the atmosphere longer:
while only 10.8% of the flux, they account for 18.3% of the burden. About 35% of this
burden is due to a secondary reaction in which SO2 emissions from combustion form
ammonium sulphate, and a further 8% is due to nitrate formation from NOx emissions
(IPCC, 1996).
Coal combustion has been estimated to contribute almost one third of global
anthropogenic PM10 emissions, as shown in Table 2-4, although this data excludes some
important sources such as fugitive dust from mining (Wolf and Hidy, 1997).
In Australia, electricity supply (dominated by coal fired power stations) accounted for
12.1% and 7.7% of total anthropogenic PM10 emissions in NSW for the 2000/2001 and
2001/2002 reporting years respectively according to the NPI (www.npi.gov.au). Coal
mining was the single greatest source, accounting for 43.4% and 50.9%, while motor
9
vehicles contributed 9.5% and 8.5% of the PM10 for the same periods (note that mining
emissions are not included in Table 2-4). As will be discussed below, these two sources
produce very different particle sizes: motor vehicle emissions are typically less than 1
µm (Wilson and Suh, 1997) while dust from mining is significantly coarser with only 3-
6% of total emissions in the PM2.5 fraction (DUAP, 1997).
Figure 2-1: Idealised mass distribution of particle sizes found in the atmosphere
(Watson and Chow, 1994).
Note that the cut off between the accumulation and coarse modes is perhaps more
properly placed at around 1 µm as this is the upper size for particles formed through the
formation and growth of particles in the accumulation mode, as well as being the
minimum size for particles formed by breakage due to energetic limitations (CAFE,
2004). However, by convention, coarse particles are defined as particles larger than 2.5
µm and fine particles as those less than 2.5 µm.
Table 2-5 (adapted from (Wilson and Suh, 1997)) explains the formation and properties
of particles in more detail. Note the accumulation and nucleation modes referred to
above have consolidated into a “fine” mode, as normally found in urban ambient
particulate matter (Wilson and Suh, 1997).
Table 2-5: Sources and Properties of Fine and Coarse Mode Particles (Wilson and
Suh, 1997).
Naturally the size distribution of the ambient aerosol is very dependent on location,
meteorology and local sources, and can vary substantially with season (e.g. due to the
use of domestic fires for winter heating). Figure 2-2 shows measured size distributions
at four cities in Australia, with varying contributions of the three particle size modes
(Ayers et al., 1999b). Most of the distributions show only two modes, although the
Canberra aerosol has some suggestion of a nucleation mode, possibly from wood fires
as these samples were taken in winter.
Figure 2-2: Mass distribution of urban aerosol in four Australian cities. Taken
from (Ayers et al., 1999b).
12
areas tends to be dominated by carbon (typically 20-40%) and soluble species such as
NO3-, SO42- and NH4+ (highly variable, commonly ~40%), with relatively small
amounts of crustal material (4-15%). In contrast, the coarser components (PM2.5-10 or
PM2.5-15) tend to be dominated by crustal material (50-90%).
Similar results are reported in a recent review of EU monitoring (CAFE, 2004). PM2.5
in urban areas was found to consist mainly of elemental and organic carbon (20-35%)
and secondary organic aerosols (20-40%), with smaller amounts of crustal material (2-
20%) and marine aerosol (1-3%). Roadside sampling was broadly similar, although
higher levels of elemental and organic carbon were noted due to vehicle emissions.
PM2.5-10 was not separately reported, although PM10 samples contained more marine (5-
12%) and crustal material (10-30%) indicating that these particles were more prevalent
in the PM2.5-10 fraction.
13
A number of other studies have also been conducted in Brisbane. Most particulate
matter during typical high asthma incidence periods (autumn) was found to be less than
2 µm and composed of carbon from vehicle emissions, crustal material and some spores
and soil bacteria (Glikson et al., 1995). Fungal spores were found to dominate the 2 µm
to 10 µm size range (Mastalerz et al., 1998). Subsequent studies with dichotomous
samplers and a cascade impactor have shown that the PM2.5 and PM2.5-10 size fractions
show similar patterns to overseas studies, in that the crustal signature is most
pronounced in the larger size fraction while the fines are dominated by combustion
products and soluble salts (Chan et al., 1999b; Chan et al., 2000).
PM2.5 has also been sampled and analysed at Muswellbrook in the Upper Hunter Valley,
New South Wales to determine composition and origin (MSC, 2003). Figure 2-3 shows
the average composition of the aerosol over the 2002-2003 monitoring period for a site
near the local water treatment plant. The aerosol is dominated by ammonium sulphate
and organics with some soot, crustal material and salt. It is interesting to note the
significant contribution (24%) of ammonium sulphate to PM2.5 mass (total ~ 7 µg m-3).
14
Power stations also emit significant quantities of the oxides of sulphur and nitrogen,
which form secondary aerosols through oxidation in the atmosphere after emission. At
least 90% of the sulphur in the coal enters the gas phase during combustion as SO2
(Hewitt, 2001), with around 1-3% emitted as SO3 (Graham and Sarofim, 1997). High
temperature combustion processes also produce NOx (NO and NO2) from nitrogen in
the coal (fuel nitrogen) and from oxidation of N2 at combustion temperatures (Pershing
and Wendt, 1979). Oxidation rates of SO2 and the formation of secondary aerosols will
be discussed further in Section 2.6 which reviews previous studies assessing the impacts
of power stations.
The current section will concentrate on primary particulates and review ash formation
mechanisms and emission controls before presenting a summary of studies that have
characterised stack emissions.
Ash characteristics vary greatly for different coals, due to the impact of mineral matter
composition and distribution within the raw coal and its subsequent behaviour upon
combustion (Wibberley and Wall, 1986). Most coal burnt in NSW power stations is
sub-bituminous (“Black coal”); lower rank coals such as lignite are not as mature and
15
have much higher moisture and lower calorific value (Smoot, 1991). The current
understanding of ash formation mechanisms from black coal is illustrated in Figure 2-4.
Proces s
during Cooling
Boiler input
Combustion
Fragmentation
Excluded Minerals
Fusion, melting
Char Fragmentation
< 30 µm
Swelling
Char Heterogeneous Surface
Condensation Enrichment
Vaporisation
Homogeneous 0.02 – 0.2 µm
Condensation
Coal Particle
with included 30 µm
minerals Non- Coalescence
Swelling
Char
< 1 µm
Shedding
Cenosphere
Formation
10 - 90 µm
Fragmentation
< 30 µm
The mechanisms can be summarised as follows (Raask, 1985; Wibberley and Wall,
1986):
16
char tends to burn as shrinking core, ash droplets form on particle
surface, some coalesce
o coals that swell and fragment (form finer ash):
porous char, may fragment
individual fragments burn as shrinking core (smaller than with
non-swelling)
may produce hollow char cenospheres, where agglomeration of
ash droplets is delayed, producing numerous finer ash particles
o vaporised elements – re-condense as temperature decreases
heterogeneous condensation - on existing particles (surface
enrichment)
homogeneous nucleation/coalescence – fume production
Higher combustion temperatures have been shown to increase both the proportion of
ash less than 10 µm and the degree of cenosphere formation (Wibberley and Wall,
1986). Cenospheres or other hollow fly ash particles were found to have a minimum
size of 10 µm to 30 µm depending on the size of the pulverised fuel. Studies on six US
coals found that the degree of cenosphere formation was positively correlated with the
mineral content of the coal, and that the solid particles were consistently smaller than
the cenospheres by a factor of approximately 3 (Ghosal and Self, 1995). It can therefore
be expected that the preferential removal of larger particles by collection devices will
result in an enrichment of solid particles relative to cenospheres.
17
The size distribution of fly ash has been found to be have at least two modes, with a
submicron mode with a peak in the mass size distribution around 0.1 µm (McElroy et
al., 1982). This mode, formed by vaporisation and condensation, was expected to be
enriched in silicon and iron, as well as other volatile elements (Desrosiers et al., 1979).
Laboratory studies on bituminous coals have confirmed that the submicron fume was
dominated by silicon and iron, although silicon was generally slightly depleted and iron
significantly enriched relative to the bulk concentration (Quann et al., 1990). Sodium
and phosphorus were also significantly enriched in the submicron fraction (Quann et al.,
1990).
Mechanisms of operation will not be dealt with in depth in this review; instead the focus
will be on collection efficiency and the character of emissions from these control
systems. ESPs function by imparting an electrical charge on particles using a corona
discharge, and use an electrostatic field to remove the particles from the gas flow on
grounded collection plates (De Nevers, 1995). ESP performance is dependent on
particle size and ash resistivity. Particle size has an effect due to the ability of particles
18
to receive a charge in the electric field as well as the trade off between electrostatic
force (proportional to the square of diameter) and Stokes viscous drag (proportional to
diameter) (De Nevers, 1995). Ash resistivity is significant as it determines the potential
drop across the particles deposited on the plate and hence the potential available for
particle charging.
Fabric filters are less widely used than ESPs due to higher operating costs (Heeley,
2001). They are also relatively new on the power generation scene, with the earliest fly-
ash installation in Australia being a trial plant commissioned in 1972 (Heeley, 2001).
However, they are less sensitive than ESPs to changes in fly ash resistivity (Benitez,
1993) and are becoming more popular as emission controls tighten. Both Bayswater
and Liddell power stations utilise fabric filters (Heeley, 2001). Fabric filters operate
like large vacuum cleaners, with large fans pulling the flue gas through bag houses
containing between 140 and 400 tube shaped bags (Carr and Smith, 1984). Collection
occurs as the gas flows through pores in the cake of collected material built up on the
bag surface. The cake is periodically removed, generally by reversing the gas flow and
allowing the bags to partially collapse inward (Carr and Smith, 1984). Particle emission
during operation is greatest just after cleaning, before the cake is re-established, and the
porosity of the cake is important for subsequent efficiency and pressure drop (Vann
Bush et al., 1989). Emissions are believed to arise from inefficient collection of 0.5-1.0
µm particles due to a trade off between the collection mechanisms of diffusion and
impaction, as well as a large particle penetration mode due to the redispersion of
agglomerates that bleed through the fabric during cleaning (Carr and Smith, 1984).
The majority of the published data on the size distribution of emissions is from plants
using ESPs, with comparatively few studies of plants using fabric filters. ESPs have
high efficiencies for small and large particles but have a noticeable drop in efficiency
between about 0.1 µm and 1 µm, where up to 10% penetration has been reported
(McElroy et al., 1982; Helble, 2000). As this coincides with the
evaporation/condensation mode, there has considerable interest in the impact of volatile
species on the composition of emitted particulates.
Fabric filters also have a decrease in efficiency between 0.1 µm and 1 µm, although the
penetration is considerably less with a maximum of around 1% (McElroy et al., 1982;
19
Carr and Smith, 1984). Figure 2-5 compares the collection efficiency for a fabric filter
baghouse and an ESP. The mass contribution of submicron particles to outlet emissions
has been quoted as 2% for the fabric filter and 20% for ESP (McElroy et al., 1982).
Figure 2-5: Particle size dependent collection efficiency for fabric filter baghouse
and ESP (taken from (McElroy et al., 1982)).
100
Uncontrolled
90
ESP
80 Baghouse
C umul at i v e % Pas s i ng
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.1 1 10 100
Aero dy nami c Equi v al ent D i am eter (µm)
Figure 2-6: Cumulative particle size distribution of emissions for dry bottom
boilers burning pulverised bituminous and sub-bituminous coal with various
controls. Data sourced from US EPA Table 1.1-6 (1995).
Data published by the US EPA relating to the size distribution of emitted particulates
from utilities using ESP and fabric filter plants is shown in Figure 2-6, together with the
20
uncontrolled emissions or feed fly ash to the emission control device (USEPA, 1995).
This data differs from that of McElroy et al. (1982) in that the fabric filter emissions are
finer than those with ESP, with 25% less than 1 µm compared to 14% for ESP.
Figure 2-6 also illustrates the relative enrichment in the finer particles resulting from the
efficiency limitations of both control devices. For example, 92% of fabric filter
emissions were less than 10 µm compared to 23% upstream of the filter. Note that the
emissions for the ESP case in Figure 2-6 are considerably coarser than those found in a
survey of Dutch power plants, where the 90% passing size was found to be between
around 3 and 5 µm (Meij et al., 1985).
The impact of pollution control equipment on the size and chemistry of emissions will
be discussed further in the following sections.
21
Reference: Study Emission Particle Size Information Morphology
location; Control; sample
Coal type point & method
(Mamane et US; ESP; Two fractions: minus 2.5 >95% spherical with
al., 1986) Unspecified In stack; µm and 2.5 to 5-10 µm rather smooth surfaces
Dichotomous aerodynamic diameter.
sampler with Mass split approx. 15/85%
Teflon filters
(Meij et al., Netherlands ESP; Aerodynamic diameter of Spherical, density about
-3
1985) ; In-stack; all particles < 10 µm; 90% 2.7g cm
Bituminous Anderson Mk III less than 6 µm; mass
(US&Aust) Cascade median 1-2 µm
Impactor
(Lichtman US; two ESP; High S: peak ~ 2 µm; 4% Submicron examined with
and plants using In-stack; larger than 8 µm. SEM/EDA. Spherical,
Mroczkows high/low Anderson Low S: bimodal, peaks at solid particles for both
ki, 1985) sulphur coal cascade impactor 6 and 0.7 µm. 4% larger coals, some surface
than 30 µm. nodules (more common
with High S coal).
(McElroy et US, 25MW Fabric Filter 8% of emissions <2 µm, Not reported
al., 1982) boiler, sub 0.5% <0.3 µm
bituminous
(McElroy et US, 5 other ESP Bimodal size distribution Not reported
al., 1982) boilers from measured at 540MW
113-540MW boiler. 4 to 20% of
emissions <2 µm, 0.2 to
2.2% <0.3 µm
(Fisher et US; ESP; Range 1 µm to 60 µm; Smallest size fraction
al., 1978) Unspecified Stack; classified into 4 size (VMD = 2.2 µm): 87%
low S, high Cyclone, fractions with cyclones non-opaque solid sphere;
ash & TM centripeter & filter. 8% non-opaque
cenosphere;
(Jacko and US; ESP; Range to >14 µm, mass Not reported (trace
Neuendorf, Hi S Indiana Stack; mean 5.1 µm. 18% < 2 element study)
1977) Anderson µm.
cascade impactor
(Cheng et US; ESP; Aerodynamic MMD 4.9 Spherical, rather smooth
al., 1976) Unspecified Stack; µm, 84% < 20 µm surfaces
Anderson
impactor
22
2.4.3.2 Morphology
Fisher et al. (1978) identified 11 morphological classes in ESP emissions and
investigated variations with particle size. Table 2-7 summarises the key morphologies
observed and shows the tendency towards solid spheres with decreasing particle size:
There is limited data available on the chemical composition of submicron particles, but
it appears they are still composed primarily of the major and more volatile ash
components in coal, primarily silica, alumina, iron, calcium and sodium (Smith et al.,
1979; Neville et al., 1983; Quann et al., 1990). Sulphur in the ash was found to report
mainly to the submicron fraction (Kauppinen and Pakkanen, 1990), which was also
significantly enriched in volatile elements such as Ca, V, Cu, Sr, Cd and Pb. Similar
23
results were reported by Quann et al. (1990), with significant enrichment of Na, P, Mn,
V, Cr, As, Sb, Zn and Co observed for laboratory studies on bituminous coals.
The enrichment of certain elements in the fine particles has been shown to be largely
dependent on elemental volatility (Helble et al., 1996; Helble, 2000). Trace elements
can be classified into three broad groups according to their partitioning behaviour
(Clarke and Sloss, 1992):
Group 1: Elements concentrated in coarse residues or partitioned equally
between coarse residues and fly ash e.g. Ba, Ce, Cs, Mg, Mn, and Th. These
elements are relatively non-volatile.
Group 2: Elements concentrated in fly ash relative to coarse residue. Enriched
on fine particles that escape particulate control systems. These elements are
moderately volatile e.g. As, Cd, Cu, Pb, Sb, Se, Zn.
Group 3: Elements which are highly volatile and which tend to remain in
vapour phase (depleted in all solid phases) e.g. Cl, Br, Hg, I.
Many studies have demonstrated the enrichment of Group 2 elements in the finer
fractions (Natusch et al., 1974; Jacko and Neuendorf, 1977; Mamane et al., 1986;
Kauppinen and Pakkanen, 1990) and also at the surface of particles (Linton et al., 1976;
Linton et al., 1977; Hock and Lichtman, 1983). Other authors have also found that
these elements are preferentially associated with iron rich particles (Lauf, 1985) and
also with calcium oxides (Querol et al., 1995). It has also been suggested that some of
the observed enrichment in trace elements such as Cr, Ni, Cu and Zn is due to the
influence of particle composition on electrical properties (Cereda et al., 1996).
Significant enrichment was also observed in the finer sizes for As, Zn, Hg, Ba, Ni and
Cs for the only study located that reports results for a boiler equipped with a fabric filter
(McElroy et al., 1982).
24
No relevant studies were found for Australian facilities.
Fly ash is predominantly composed of particles that have fused during the combustion
process, usually to form spherical particles (Cheng et al., 1976). Emitted particles tend
to be solid, particularly in the finer sizes (Fisher et al., 1978), and there are sometimes
deposits or other surface irregularities (Lichtman and Mroczkowski, 1985). Aggregates
or agglomerates are sometimes observed, although this is possibly an artefact of the
sampling process where the particles have not been immediately characterised
(Lichtman and Mroczkowski, 1985; Kauppinen and Pakkanen, 1990).
Minimal data is as yet available on emissions from plants equipped with fabric filters or
Australian coal fired power stations. However, similar enrichments can be expected in
the submicron component of emissions from plants equipped with fabric filters as this is
expected to be determined by the ash formation mechanisms rather than the collection
equipment. This is consistent with the results of the one study which has presented
results for a boiler equipped with a fabric filter (McElroy et al., 1982).
25
weather conditions (Kiely, 1998). It is also helpful to think in terms of events
consisting of both episodic high concentrations and longer-term average concentrations,
as acute health impacts are associated with high concentration events (Brimblecombe,
1987). For example, still conditions and temperature inversions overnight are well
known to promote trapping of smoke from domestic fires close to ground. Convection
and higher wind speeds during the day result in dispersion of the smoke
(Brimblecombe, 1987).
Plumes from power stations behave somewhat differently for two main reasons. Firstly,
the stack is much higher than a domestic chimney (typically 200m or so) and secondly
the plumes have substantial thermal buoyancy, which causes them to rise much higher
than domestic emissions (Chambers et al., 1982; Hanna et al., 1982). High ground level
concentrations from plumes are likely to result from a different mechanism to domestic
smoke as the emissions usually sit above rather than below the stable boundary layer
(Guthrie and Lamb, 1976). In this case it is convection from the sun heating the ground
that breaks down the overnight stability of the atmosphere and causes mixing to ground
of emissions trapped above the boundary layer (Jakeman et al., 1985; Physick et al.,
1991).
The dispersion of industrial plumes has been extensively studied to determine both long
and short-range impacts. While plumes can and do remain as discernable entities over
considerable distances – the Mt Isa plume has been tracked using SO2 as an indicator
for up to 1800 km (Carras and Williams, 1988) - predicting their interaction with the
atmosphere is by no means straightforward due to the complexity of the flows within
the atmosphere. Because both the plume and the atmosphere are turbulent fluids,
detailed mathematical modelling has proved problematical until recently. Classical
approaches to predicting pollutant dispersion tackled the issue phenomenologically,
looking at the observed behaviour of plumes under different weather conditions and
developing empirical models to describe observations (Carras, 1995; Kiely, 1998).
In the past, the most widely used model to calculate ground level concentrations was the
Gaussian plume model (Carras, 1995). The major simplifying assumption is that the
distribution of concentration within the plume is described by a normal or Gaussian
function about the centreline of the plume. Spreading coefficients are used to describe
26
the horizontal and vertical dispersion of the plume, while the plume centreline rises due
primarily to the temperature difference between it and the surrounding air. While plume
rise has been studied in detail and described mathematically by Briggs (Briggs, 1975),
spreading coefficients are more difficult to describe analytically. These are generally
determined from plume dispersion curves, which give the relationship between the
coefficient and the distance downwind for various atmospheric stability classes (Carras,
1995).
Gaussian plume models generally describe the qualitative behaviour of plumes well,
providing there is sufficient meteorological data to adequately describe the wind field.
However, concentrations can often be significantly different to actual measurements due
to the simplifications of the complex nature of the atmosphere implicit in the model.
Until recently, more sophisticated models have in general been unable to perform
significantly better than the Gaussian approach due to the complexity of the atmosphere
and local scale meteorology (Carras, 1995).
CSIRO have recently developed and commercialised a model called The Air Pollution
Model, or TAPM (Hurley, 2000). TAPM differs from the Gaussian approach in that it
uses a three-dimensional finite element analysis approach to solve the fundamental fluid
dynamics and scalar transport equations to predict both meteorology and pollutant
concentrations (Hurley, 1999). TAPM has recently been shown to give good agreement
with observation over extended study periods (Gras et al., 2001; Hurley et al., 2001;
Hurley et al., 2003) and is therefore well suited for determining seasonal and diurnal
dispersion patterns for the study area.
Each of these groups of studies will be discussed separately concluding with a summary
of the key outcomes.
7 -1
Reported emission rate = 88.19 x 10 µg s (Padmanabhamurty and Gupta, 1977)
Fly ash produced = 375,000 tpa = 1027 tpd (Mehra et al., 1998)
12 10 -1
Fly ash per second = 375,000 / 365 /24 /3600 * 10 = 1.19 x 10 µg s
7 10
Calculated efficiency = 1 - (88.19 x 10 /1.19 x 10 ) = 92.6%
c.f. quoted “efficiency of dust collector > 90%” (Padmanabhamurty and Gupta, 1977)
The later report indicated that ESPs were employed for dust collection with an
efficiency of 99.3% (Mehra et al., 1998). It is unclear whether this was a plant
modification, but it would appear that emissions would be approximately 10% of the
amount modelled earlier (Padmanabhamurty and Gupta, 1977). The later study
examined elemental concentrations in topsoil along four transects to a distance of 8 km
(Mehra et al., 1998). The authors concluded that fly ash dispersal from the stacks was a
28
significant source of alkali, alkaline earth and to some extent heavy metals in soils,
although the many scattered sources of metal pollution in Delhi made it impossible to
apportion sources. It was concluded that the impact of metal contamination from fly
ash was “not large enough to give cause for concern” (Mehra et al., 1998).
Similar results were found in the environs of a 540MW plant at Korba in India, with the
top 30cm of soil alkalinised by fly ash deposition and enriched in Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, Be,
Ba, Ca, Mg and Sr (Patel and Pandey, 1986). Dry deposition sampling using polythene
jars confirmed that the finer particles are transported further than coarser ones. At 1 km
from the source, fitted with ESPs and mechanical dust collectors, deposited material
was 40% minus 5 µm (60% 5-30 µm) while at 4 km the deposited material was 65%
minus 5 µm (Patel and Pandey, 1986).
Deposition studies in the US have been principally concerned with trace elements. One
study employed Gaussian plume, atmospheric transport and diffusion models to
estimate changes in soil concentrations of As, B, F, Hg, Se, U and V (Wangen and
Williams, 1980). Calculations indicated very little change in total soil concentrations,
although the comment was made that analysis of the soluble fraction of soil elements
could be more sensitive to power station impacts (Wangen and Williams, 1980).
A recent study in Germany concluded that a local reduction of calciferous fly ash
deposition due to the closure of lignite-fired power stations could have a detrimental
impact on the bioavailability of heavy metals (Manz et al., 1999). The then current
predominance of acid forming emissions was expected to acidify soils over time, and
increase the solubility of such elements, which had formerly been kept insoluble by
large quantities of basic fly ash.
Lake sediments have also been studied to examine deposition of fly ash from oil shale
combustion in Estonia (Alliksaar and Punning, 1998). Optical microscopy was used to
identify significant numbers of fly ash particles larger than 5 µm from oil shale
combustion in sediments, although there was no delineation between power generation
and industrial sources. Significant impacts on local vegetation and deposition of
calcium were noted in the Gulf of Finland due to oil shale fuelled power plants and a
cement factory (Jalkanen et al., 2000).
29
Most of these studies have been conducted in areas where comparatively low grade
fuels such as lignite are used. The key effects of emissions appear to be the
alkalinisation of soils and the deposition of detectable levels of some transition
elements.
At the simplest level, plants have been used to gauge the level of pollution through the
measurement of elemental concentrations or the assessment of biological responses to
pollutants. These studies have been used to assess the level of pollution generally rather
than to apportion sources (Gonzalez and Pignata, 1997; Garty et al., 2001), although the
impact of lignite fired power plants on deposition of some metals has been studied in
Northern Greece (Sawidis et al., 2001). This study found that foliage close to 4 power
stations with a total capacity of 3.6 GW showed elevated levels of Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu and
Cd compared to remote sites. The local power plants were found to have similar metal
profiles in their emissions, with damage and highest concentrations following the
prevailing wind direction (Sawidis et al., 2001).
Plants have also been used in receptor modelling, where the elemental deposition is
determined through the analysis of many samples taken over a wide area encompassing
a number of known or suspected emitters. The resulting matrix of data is then analysed
using complex mathematical techniques to resolve a number of source characteristics,
which can then be plotted on a map to show regional impacts (Stern, 1986). This
approach is termed receptor modelling as the interpretation is based on information
gained from the analysis of the samples at each receptor. The value of receptor
modelling can be greatly enhanced by obtaining local source samples to allow more
30
specific “fingerprinting” of the chemical characteristics of specific sources (Stern,
1986). While applied in many areas to delineate industrial sources e.g. (Kuik and
Wolterbeek, 1995; Reis et al., 1996; Bargagli et al., 1997), only one study was found
which identified power stations as a distinct source. This study found that brown coal
combustion in the Czech Republic contributed around 90% of the sulphur and 75% of
the As found in oak tree bark at 457 sites, as well as 56% of the Fe and 53% of the Se
(Bohm et al., 1998).
In summary, biomonitors have been used to show that a number of power stations using
lignite make a discernable contribution to sulphur and transition metal deposition. No
studies were found reporting results for power stations utilising black coal.
Factor analysis has been used on chemical analysis results from 7 day TSP samples in
Hong Kong to show that emissions from a 4 GW coal fired power station contributed an
estimated 4.9 µg m-3 to TSP, or 17% of the mass contribution for the 6 identified
sources (Fung and Wong, 1995). Selenium and arsenic were the elements most strongly
associated with the coal combustion factor.
Chemical mass balance techniques have been applied to SEM and chemistry data from
12 hour PM10 samples at Philadelphia in the USA, which had a coal fired boiler about
10 km from the sampling site and several industrial sources (Dzubay and Mamane,
1989). Coal fly ash was found to contribute less than 1% of PM10. The major
components of PM10 were found to be sulphate (52%), soil (20%) and motor vehicle
exhaust (13%).
There is therefore evidence that both primary and secondary power station emissions
can make a significant contribution to ambient particle mass in certain situations.
Sampling with a cascade impactor around a coal-fired power station in NE Spain has
been used to study oxidation rates and the variations in chemistry with size (Querol et
al., 1999). This was primarily a study of secondary particulates, with the authors
commenting that “the emission levels of secondary aerosols are generally higher than
those of primary particles… given the high retention efficiencies of particulate controls”
(Querol et al., 1999). The authors found that oxidation rates varied with the season and
ranged from 0.8% S h-1 to 5.9% S h-1. Secondary ions SO42- and NH4+ were
concentrated in the finest fraction, while quartz, illite, kaolinite and other minerals were
mainly concentrated in the >5 µm fraction.
33
gaseous precursors are generally more significant (Querol et al., 1999; Khosah
and McManus, 2001).
Table 2-8: Global Sulphur Emissions from Natural and Anthropogenic Sources
Mt S y-1 (Bates et al., 1992).
Bridgman concluded in a review of acid rain studies that while “elevated levels of
sulphate and nitrate in rainfall of the Latrobe Valley and the Hunter Valley may be due
to power station and industrial sources located there, [they] do not prove to be a
problem” (Bridgman, 1989).
Trace element deposition has been studied around the Wallerawang power station near
Lithgow, NSW (Swaine, 1994). Sphagnum moss collected from pristine areas in the
Snowy Mountains was exposed in vertical and horizontal bags for 3-month intervals at
46 locations between 1980 and 1983. The moss was then collected and analysed for up
to 39 elements using optical emission spectroscopy, atomic absorption spectroscopy,
neutron activation analysis and chemical methods for Cl and F (Swaine, 1984). The
deposition of trace elements was found to decrease with distance from the stack, and
showed seasonal variation due to weather patterns. The proportion of deposited mass
34
that could be attributed to fly ash was estimated by using Ge as a tracer element: the Ge
content of fly ash was 75 ppm compared to 1.5 ppm in local soils (Swaine, 1984). The
estimated proportion of fly ash was naturally dependent on direction and time of year,
but was 11-17% at some sample points 8-10 km from the stacks. Trace element
deposition from stack emissions was compared to other sources such as rock
weathering, litter decay and fertilisers. The emissions were found to be a significant
source of Mo and Se, “although the amounts are not considered to be detrimental”
(Swaine, 1994).
Chemical mass balance techniques have been applied at various sites in Australia to
assess aerosol sources. Since 1991, between 12 and 36 PM2.5 samplers have been
employed in monitoring air quality within a 200 km radius of Sydney (Cohen et al.,
1996). Analysis of over 9000 24-hour filter samples was used to define 6 fingerprints:
motor vehicles, smoke, coal combustion, soil, industry and sea spray. The contribution
of coal combustion was not reported, although the reported fingerprint for coal
combustion consisted of hydrogen, sodium, aluminium, silica, phosphorus, sulphur,
potassium, calcium and iron (Cohen et al., 1996).
A study using individual particle analysis by SEM to apportion sources in the urban
ambient aerosol found fly ash as a detectable but minor component at five sites around
Brisbane, Queensland (Chan et al., 1999a). The contribution of fly ash to PM10 mass
was estimated at between 0.2 and 2.8% on individual samples, with a mean value of
0.7%.
Two Hunter Valley studies were also found. The first considered the impact of power
station emissions on deposited dust in the Hunter Valley. This was an internal report
prepared by Pacific Power, who operated Bayswater and Liddell power stations at the
time (Malfroy et al., 1993). The study examined samples collected from a network of
deposition gauges using XRD and optical microscopy and concluded that the “fly ash
contribution from Bayswater and Liddell Power Stations to the regional dust depositions
is conservatively estimated to be less than 5%”. This appears to be more a maximum
value of the contribution of fly ash, with most of the data in the report indicating a
contribution well below 5% (Malfroy et al., 1993).
35
The second Hunter Valley study assessed the contribution of power station particulate
emissions to ambient particulate matter prior to the installation of fabric filters at
Liddell (Jakeman and Simpson, 1987). The contribution of Liddell emissions to TSP
was estimated by calculating the dilution of SO2 from source to monitoring site at
McInerny’s farm, around 6 km to the NW of the station, and assuming particulates were
dispersed similarly. The maximum daily contribution to TSP due to emissions was
calculated to be 14 µg m-3 with an hourly maximum of 90 µg m-3. It should be noted
that the emissions concentration used was much higher than current emissions, 188 mg
m-3 compared to 8 mg m-3 (Rothe, 2003). Even so, these concentrations were judged
negligible compared to the then USEPA 24hr standard of 260 µg m-3 for TSP. SO2 and
NOx were believed to pose a greater threat than particulates although further sampling
on 1-15 µm material was recommended (Jakeman and Simpson, 1987).
36
While there have been a number of earlier studies in the Hunter Valley to examine the
impacts of various industries on local air quality, these studies have generally
concentrated on dust from mining operations (NERDDC, 1988; Bridgman, 1998) and
sulphur dioxide emissions from the power stations (Chambers et al., 1982; Physick et
al., 1991; Carras et al., 1992). While some very limited information is available on the
deposition rates from power station particulate emissions (Malfroy et al., 1993), the
only information on the contribution of power station primary emissions to ambient fine
particulate matter was from a study prior to the installation of fabric filters (Jakeman
and Simpson, 1987). This section will briefly review the meteorology of the region
before an overview of previous studies in the area.
Bridgman (1998) also notes the importance of understanding the structure of the
airshed, defined as the three dimensional space above a surface location. The top border
of the airshed is usually the boundary layer inversion, as this provides an upper limit to
the dispersion of particulates. The most unfavourable conditions for dispersion are
generally overnight and early in the morning, when the inversion is relatively low
(about 500 m) and winds are calm (Bridgman, 1998). Solar heating breaks the
inversion by heating the air from below through the course of the day.
Seasonal impacts in the Hunter Valley can be summarised as follows (Bridgman and
Cameron, 2000):
37
Winter: region affected by mid-latitude westerly wind regime. Local drainage
flows (200-700 m deep) from the west with average speed on ~3 m s-1 dominate on
days with high pressure and weak synoptic flow. Drainage flows may persist for up
to 16 hours per day and result in high pollutant concentrations due to inversions and
lack of dilution.
Summer: region affected by sub-tropical south-easterly circulation. Moist south-
easterly airstreams flow onto coastal areas, producing increased rainfall compared to
winter. Overnight drainage flows still occur but are weaker with average speed of
1.6 m s-1. Sea breezes from NE and E occur on about 1/3 of days, starting in the late
morning and lasting up to 13.5 hours. Irregular cool changes shift wind direction to
the SW (“southerly buster”).
Several studies were conducted to assess the impact of power station emissions around
the commissioning of Bayswater power station in the mid 1980s. Table 2-10
summarises some of the publications from these studies, which focussed primarily on
ground level concentrations (“glc”) of SO2. These studies confirm the importance of
inversions and trapping of pollutants for high concentration episodes, and indicate the
inability of Gaussian models to accurately model such events.
38
Study & Area Summary and key findings
(Jakeman and Gaussian model with trapping used to assess potential locations for further power
Simpson, 1987) stations. Bayswater/Liddell plume produced highest concentrations in line with
Hunter Valley prevailing winds i.e. NW-SE.
(Physick et al., Prognostic wind field/Lagrangian particle model approach (a la TAPM) used to
1991) predict SO2 glc’s and results compared to Gaussian model. Found that the
middle Hunter prognostic model predicted wind fields well and performed considerably better than
Valley Gaussian model under fumigation conditions in particular.
(Carras et al., Plumes from Bayswater and Liddell mainly travelled down valley under influence of
1992) NW wind in winter. Plumes normally merged within ~10 km from sources.
Hunter Valley & Central Coast plume behaviour very complex and poorly described by simple
Central Coast models due to terrain and presence of sea breezes in summer months.
Gaussian plume models generally OK - Plume spreading coefficients developed for
stable and convective conditions; plume rise conformed to Briggs’ formula in stable
but not convective conditions.
Bayswater/Liddell in-plume peak SO2 ~40 ppb at Muswellbrook, <25 ppb at
Newcastle.
Factor analysis has been used to evaluate the contribution of various sources to
rainwater contamination in the Hunter Valley (Bridgman, 1992). Soil and
animal/fertiliser sources were found to be the main sources that determined water
quality over most of the Hunter Region. Industrial sources contributed 10 to 47% of
observed variance, with the highest results in the mid Hunter (between Singleton and
approximately 20 km to the east). It was also concluded that local sources were more
significant than long-range transport of pollutants from the Sydney basin 175 km to the
south.
In summary, the meteorology of the Hunter Valley has been well characterised and SO2
has been shown in a number of studies to be a suitable indicator of emissions from
power stations. High SO2 concentrations appear to arise from trapping of pollutants
through overnight inversions and solar heating bringing the plume to ground (Chambers
et al., 1982).
39
• There was a significant correlation between community perceptions of dust
problems and dust deposition rates, although inconsistencies were noted in
“nuisance” thresholds between individuals;
• Some survey respondents blamed dust pollution for health complaints such as
asthma, nasal congestion, sinus problems and lung complaints;
• A number of respondents who had moved to the area said they believed their
health had deteriorated as a result of the dust;
• A review of published data on size distribution of particulates emitted by various
mining activities indicated approximately 6% was less than 2.5 µm, 52% lay in
the range 2.5 to 15 µm and 42% was larger than 15 µm;
• Dust deposition rates (measured and modelled) decreased rapidly with distance
from the source, due to the rapid fall out of coarse particles;
• Power station particulate emissions were not considered.
The only two studies dealing with power station primary particulate emissions
specifically were discussed in Section 2.7. These studies are not believed to reflect the
current impact of emissions on ambient air quality for the following reasons:
• One of the studies considered dust deposition rather than ambient air quality
(Malfroy et al., 1993)
• The other study used dilution estimates rather than sampling to determine
contributions to airborne particulate mass, and was based on significantly higher
mass emission rates than current (Jakeman and Simpson, 1987).
In summary, while airborne dust has received considerable attention in the Hunter
Valley, the main focus has been on the contribution from mining activities. Past studies
on power station emissions have been limited to dust deposition and estimation of mass
contributions based on assumptions that are no longer valid. This study will address
this deficiency and assess the contribution of power station emissions to air quality in
the context of other sources. While mining emissions may be more significant in mass
terms, they are coarser and less likely to travel long distances.
40
2.8 GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE AND THESIS OBJECTIVES
Previous studies into the significance of power station emissions in terms of ambient air
quality can be summarised as follows:
• Primary particulate emissions have been found to be a significant contributor to
TSP in one study (Fung and Wong, 1995) and a minor component in several
other studies including one in Brisbane, Australia (Chan et al., 1999a);
• Secondary particulates formed from the oxidation of power station emissions in
the form of SO2 and NOx can be a significant component of the aerosol (Querol
et al., 1999; Khosah and McManus, 2001), although oxidation rates in Australia
are slower than overseas due to lower levels of background pollution (Carras
and Williams, 1988; Ayers et al., 1999a).
• Power station particulate emissions show bulk and surface enrichment of
potentially toxic elements, notably transition metals (Linton et al., 1976;
Mamane et al., 1986);
• Soil sampling and analysis of biomonitors have indicated that power station
emissions can have a significant local impact on the alkalinity of the soil
(Padmanabhamurty and Gupta, 1977; Mehra et al., 1998) and the uptake of
transition metals and sulphur (Bohm et al., 1998; Sawidis et al., 2001).
41
Relatively few studies have considered the impact of coal fired power generation on air
quality within Australia. A number of indirectly related studies have looked at the
impacts of dust from coal mining (NERDDC, 1988), while most of the interest on the
utilisation side has been on sulphur dioxide (Physick et al., 1991). Only three studies
were found where power station emissions have been specifically assessed within
Australia:
• A study which assessed fly ash deposition rates in the vicinity of power stations
and concluded that the maximum contribution was less than 5% (Malfroy et al.,
1993);
• A study which assessed the contribution of power station emissions to trace
element deposition, which concluded that emissions were a significant but not
detrimental source of some elements (Swaine, 1994);
• A study which estimated the contribution of power station particulate emissions
to TSP, which concluded that the maximum hourly contribution of Liddell
power station emissions when equipped with less efficient ESPs was 90 µg m-3
(Jakeman and Simpson, 1987). Modern emissions controls have significantly
reduced mass emission rates.
In contrast, the Hunter Valley has been extensively studied to examine the impact of
both emissions from open cut coal mining (Bridgman, 1998) and the impact of gaseous
emissions from power stations, in particular SO2 (Carras et al., 1992). Understanding of
the meteorology of the area is relatively mature (Bridgman and McManus, 2000).
42
Primary particulates appear to be of greater relevance to the Australian context due to
expectations of relatively slow oxidation rates near to the power stations (Williams et
al., 1981; Ayers and Granek, 1997). The goal of this project can therefore be refined to
develop and implement techniques and methodologies to enable the contribution of
power station primary particulates to the above areas to be assessed, and conduct a case
study. The Hunter Valley appears to be a suitable site for such a study given the body
of previous research into meteorology and dispersion of various pollutants (NERDDC,
1988; Carras et al., 1992), with the notable exception of primary particulates.
The study will also need to address the issue of temporal variations which are likely to
be critical given the episodic nature of events.
43
3 EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES
The selection process for the experimental equipment used will be dealt with briefly in
the next section to provide an overview of the project, followed by a more detailed
discussion of the methodology employed with each component.
Filter Based Air is sucked through a filter, retaining Can pre- Matching of flow and
Sampling virtually all particles (John and Reischl, classify to sample requirements:
1978). Standard gravimetric method for sample only e.g. PM10
determining mass concentration of airborne the size measurements are
particulates (Sloss, 1998). Glass fibre filters fraction of usually for a 24 hour
are the most commonly used medium for interest. period and so are not
mass determinations as they are robust, Samples can sensitive to individual
have low moisture retention and have high be subjected to events. SEM imaging is
collection efficiencies (Sloss, 1998). chemical or problematic at high
Membrane filters are more suitable when SEM analysis loading, due to the
subsequent microscopic or chemical if suitable inability to distinguish
analysis is required as they are thinner, membranes individual particles.
have lower levels of trace elements and are selected. Potential artefacts from
some media can be dissolved in organic Widely used interaction between
solvents or nitric acid. These filters are for receptor reactive particles, gas-
widely used for receptor modelling studies modelling. particle or gas-filter
(Sloss, 1998). media reactions, loss of
volatile compounds.
44
Technique Principle of Operation Advantages Disadvantages
The main disadvantages of the above methods in terms of this study can be summarised
as follows:
• While filter based sampling and cascade impactors produce physical samples
which can be analysed in bulk to determine sources, they offer limited temporal
resolution which is essential to investigate individual events;
• TEOM, Light Scattering and Beta Attenuation instruments offer superior
temporal resolution but only measure mass concentrations and cannot be
apportioned to sources.
45
These techniques were therefore not considered sufficient for the study and a new
approach was sought. A limited number of relevant studies were found in the literature
using the Burkard 7-day spore sampler, which will be discussed below.
Inlet
The large vane at the right is used to orient the inlet orifice towards the prevailing wind
direction. The sampler has a pump which draws air at a nominal 10 litres minute-1
(LPM) through an orifice 14 mm in length and 2 mm in width. The orifice can be
reduced to 0.5 mm to improve trapping efficiency in the 1-10 µm range (Burkard,
2000). The pump can be run off either mains supply or 12 V batteries for field use, and
the flow can be adjusted manually. The major advantage of this equipment is that the
particles are collected on a time resolved basis, allowing individual events to be studied.
The sampler has been used with the standard 2 mm slot to sample the urban aerosol in
London to provide temporal resolution of particulate loadings (Battarbee et al., 1997;
Mackay and Rose, 1998). Analysis based on light microscopy clearly showed an
46
increase in particulates in the morning and afternoon associated with traffic density at
rush hours (Mackay and Rose, 1998).
The sampler has also been used at the University of North Dakota, using the standard 2
mm slot and double sided carbon tape (Benson et al., 2001; Erickson et al., 2001).
Tapes were transferred to glass microscope slides for analysis by SEM analysis of
individual particles. Direct impaction on carbon tape offers significant advantages over
other sample preparation methodologies which could contaminate or alter the samples
(O'Keefe et al., 2000; Benson et al., 2001).
There is limited information available about the capture efficiency at different sizes, as
the sampler has primarily been used to collect spores and pollen, which are typically 10
to 35 µm (Frenz, 1999). Unpublished calculations by one of the co-authors of the
London study suggest that the device capture efficiency falls to below 50% for particles
less than 2 µm in diameter, although smaller particles are still captured - 59% of
particles counted were less than 0.5 µm (Mackay and Rose, 1998).
Optical microscopy uses transmitted or reflected light to generate a visible light image
of the sample, and provides information about colour, surface texture and optical
properties (Cheng et al., 1976). However, resolution at fine particle sizes is limited by
the wavelength of visible light (0.4 to 0.7 µm), with the best light microscopes limited
to a resolution of about 0.2 µm (Culling, 1974).
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) uses a very narrow, high energy electron beam
which scans across the surface of the sample (Swift, 1970). The electron beam interacts
with the sample and generates three emissions of interest:
47
• secondary electrons (SE): commonly used for imaging, these electrons produce
an image relating to the surface topography of the sample (Swift, 1970). Each
high energy primary electron in the incident beam produces many slow moving
(secondary) electrons as the primary electron collides with numerous atoms
along its path. Some of these electrons diffuse to the surface and are detected
and converted to an image by a scintillator/photomultiplier system (Swift, 1970).
• back scattered electrons (BSE): less commonly used for imaging, these
electrons are high energy primary electrons scattered with little loss of energy by
the sample. BSE images have been preferred in several previous fly ash studies
due to superior contrast between particles and background and some sensitivity
to atomic number due to the increased likelihood of interaction with larger
nuclei (Jalkanen et al., 2000; Benson et al., 2001).
• X-rays: some of the energy of the primary electrons is absorbed by the sample
through electron orbital transitions – decay back lower orbitals produce x-rays of
characteristic wavelengths which provide gross information about the chemical
composition of the sample (Swift, 1970).
SEM has several major advantages over optical microscopy for identifying particles:
• Image resolution is up to several orders of magnitude better than optical
microscopy, with resolution down to 10 nm possible with secondary electrons
(Swift, 1970);
• SEM offers superior textural resolution and has a much greater depth of field
enabling different sized objects to be in focus even though they are not on the
same plane (Goldstein, 2003);
• SEM-EDX chemistry information gives valuable data on particle composition
and possible origin. This information has been used at the University of North
Dakota to classify particles into groups (Benson et al., 2001).
However, SEM also has a several drawbacks which should also be noted:
• The SEM image is greyscale; it is not possible to see the natural colour of the
sample;
• SEM requires a vacuum and special sample preparation compared to simply
viewing a sample with an optical microscope;
48
• SEM imaging is time consuming and needs to be performed objectively for valid
results.
Filter Based As above; can use Simple, robust, can use size Insensitive to short duration
Sampling sequential filters to produce selective inlets. events. Can be subject to
more than one size fraction artefacts (both positive and
– typically a PM2.5 and a negative) as discussed in
PM2.5-10 fraction. Table 3-1.
49
Technique Principle of Operation Advantages Disadvantages
Both ATOFMS and EC/OC analysis were discounted from this study due to availability
of equipment in the first instance and limited applicability in the second. Sampling with
a cascade impactor was preferred to sampling with a filter due to its ability to readily
generate size-segregated samples of the aerosol, enabling the exploration of variations
in chemistry with size. Size segregated samples were expected to be useful to help
resolve sources, as crustal material is more likely to fall into the coarser sizes and
combustion products normally report to finer sizes (Wilson and Suh, 1997).
50
Method Acronym Remarks
Inductively coupled plasma mass ICP-MS Sample solutions aspirated into high temp flame or
spectrometry plasma; ionised particles analysed for mass to
charge spectrum.
Multi elemental capability (30-40 elements)
Accurate & high sensitivity
Can analyse low sample masses (0.5-10 mg)
ICP-MS has been extensively used for trace element determinations due to the high
sensitivity and the ability to analyse very small samples. However, the need to generate
a solution from particulate samples poses some technical and practical issues. Samples
are typically collected on a filter medium such as quartz or glass fibre or Teflon;
particulates can be removed from the filter medium by ultrasonification or by acid
digestion of the filter medium (Bettinelli et al., 1998; Querol et al., 2000). Allowances
for the chemical composition of the unexposed filters have to be made as “impurities in
glass-fibre filters affect most of the minimum detection limits” (Bettinelli et al., 1998).
An alternative approach well suited to extremely low particle masses is Ion Beam
Analysis (IBA), discussed below.
52
using such approaches to differentiate between power station emissions and crustal
material (i.e. soil, overburden etc) as they have similar chemistry: both are composed
mainly of oxides of silicon, aluminium, iron and calcium with varying levels of other
elements (Dzubay and Mamane, 1989).
53
Table 3-5: Potential methodologies for assessing ultrafine particulates.
The NAS was selected in preference to the other approaches described above for the
following reasons:
• The SMPS provides information on size distribution alone and can only be used
implicitly to examine source contributions (e.g. by cross-correlation with SO2
monitoring data);
• Filters and low pressure impactors offer minimal improvements over the
cascade impactor approach to aerosol chemistry in that individual particles can
be difficult to discern;
• ATOFMS offers significant potential for charactering individual particles but is
currently unavailable;
• The NAS is largely untested but analogous in some respects to the Burkard
sampler in that it collects samples directly on a suitable medium for individual
particle analysis. Integration with SO2 monitoring would potentially enable the
assessment of plume impacts.
54
3.2.3.2 Analysis of Ultrafine Particulate Samples
Ultrafine particulates are too small to be readily analysed using SEM and transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) is preferred. TEM also uses high energy electrons to form
images of the sample, although the key difference is that the electron beam passes
through the sample. TEM often involves complicated sample preparation to ensure that
samples are thin enough to permit transmission of some electrons (Gibbon, 1979;
Glikson et al., 1988; Clausnitzer and Singer, 1999). A different approach was used in a
study at the University of Plymouth where the minus 1 µm fraction of the urban aerosol
was impacted directly on a porous carbon film, which could then be analysed without
further sample preparation by TEM (Dye et al., 2000). This is analogous to the ability
of the NAS to collect samples on TEM grids which do not require further treatment
before analysis.
Analysis of
Historical
data
Mass Chemistry
Burkard Impactor
+ SEM + IBA
Ultrafine
TAPM
TSI NAS Dispersion
+ TEM Modelling
The next step was to select and validate an appropriate sampling site. Criteria used for
the selection of the site included:
• proximity to power stations
• security
• infrastructure for housing weather sensitive equipment and power supply
• access to historical monitoring data
• other particulate sources
• expected dispersion patterns based on air pollution modelling.
This process resulted in the selection of an existing air quality monitoring site at
Ravensworth for field sampling. The site was initially set up by Macquarie Generation
(then the Electricity Commission of NSW) at the request of the NSW EPA to monitor
air quality impacts of power stations emissions, and subsequently the potential impacts
of fly ash disposal and rehabilitation activities at the nearby Ravensworth void. The site
is located approximately 11 km to the south east of the power stations and was expected
to experience relatively frequent plume events, particularly during the winter months
when NW flows dominate. It was therefore expected that the site would provide a
suitable location to determine the impact of emissions from power stations.
56
10 km
Figure 3-3 shows the location of the Ravensworth monitoring site (“R”) relative to
Bayswater (“B”) and Liddell (“L”) power stations and townships Muswellbrook (“M”)
and Singleton (“S”). Areas disturbed by mining activities are clearly seen as white,
while the ranges bordering the valley can be seen in the top right and bottom left of the
figure. It will be noted that open cut mining activities are widespread, although the
nearest mine to the NW is approximately 15 km away. The site is 50 m from the New
England Highway, one of the principal roads in the area, and a railway line passes
approximately 160 m to the east.
57
Samples were collected on 20 mm wide double sided carbon tape sourced from
ProSciTech (PO Box 111, Thuringowa QLD 4817). The exposed tape was transferred
to standard glass microscope slides in 48 mm (1 day) sections for analysis. The spore
sampler was ideally deployed for 6 day periods, as this allowed some blank tape at the
end of the sample to facilitate handling during the transfer process.
Most of the sampling was conducted using 12 V car batteries, while two samples from
December 2002 were collected using mains supply. Battery voltage was measured at
the beginning and end of each run using a portable multimeter. Initial runs indicated
that the batteries did show some voltage drop and that maximum charging was required
to last for a full 6 days in the field. Several runs were affected by the capture of small
insects in the inlet slot, resulting in strips of unexposed tape in the wind shadow.
The flow readings were made using a rotameter like flow tube supplied by Burkard
Scientific. The device has a foam seal that fits over the inlet and only three markings –
a 10 LPM line and a “+” and “-” line approximately 5 mm above and below. The flow
was recorded at the start and end of each run by estimating the distance between the top
of the float and the 10 LPM line. These readings were subsequently converted to
flowrates by a cross-calibration of the Burkard meter against a calibrated 10 LPM
rotameter (the latter calibrated using a bubble tube). Details of the cross calibration
used to determine the indicated flowrates shown in Table 17 can be found in Appendix
A. Note also that there were two 12 V motor failures – the motors were really only
59
suitable for shorter durations and 240 V supply would be the recommended option for
any future campaigns. It will also be seen in Table 3-6 that there was some variation of
the flow with the same battery with the old and new drum. This was thought to be
slight changes in the clearance between the drum and the inlet due to stretching or
swelling of the tape. This effect was noted for both battery and mains power supply.
The sampler was located on the roof of the gas monitoring shed at Ravensworth (and
other sites) to reduce the impact of windblown coarse material close to ground. The
inlet to the sampler was approximately 2.9 metres above ground level as shown in
Figure 3-4.
Figure 3-4: Location of Burkard Spore sampler on gas shed roof at Ravensworth.
60
St50 = Stokes number at 50% efficiency
µ = air viscosity (1.81 x 10-5 kg m-1 s-1)
W = width of impactor slot (0.5 mm)
ρp = density of particle (assumed 1900 kg m-3)
C = Cunningham slip correction factor (calculated)
V = mean velocity at throat of slot
The value of St50 varies depending on the geometry of the impactor, and is particularly
sensitive to the ratio of the stopping distance S (distance from exit of slot to impaction
point) to the slot width W. The spore sampler has a clearance between slot and drum of
0.6 mm (Burkard, 2002), with the double sided adhesive tape having a thickness of 0.22
mm as measured with a micrometer. This gives an S/W ratio of 0.76 for the 0.5 mm
slot; the corresponding √St50 for a rectangular impactor according to the plots of Marple
and Willeke (1976) is approximately 0.65 – iterative calculation of the slip factor and
solution of Equation 3-1 above yields a solution for d50 of 0.82 µm at a flowrate of 9.5
LPM (see Appendix B for a the spreadsheet used for these calculations). The S/W ratio
for the 2 mm slot is 0.19, which is beyond the limits of the Marple and Willeke (1976)
plot; a conservative value of 0.50 for √St50 yields a calculated d50 of 2.7 µm at the same
flowrate. While the cut size of the larger slot is difficult to estimate with confidence, it
is clear that the smaller slot is essential for sampling particles around 1 µm.
It should also be noted, however, that Marple in an earlier paper (Marple and Liu, 1974)
found significant differences in the values obtained by various authors for √St50 with
rectangular slot impactors. A conservative upper limit of √St50 from these data would
be around 0.80, which would give a calculated d50 of 1.02 µm at a flowrate of 9.5 LPM.
The impact of collection efficiency on the mass estimates determined using the spore
sampler will be discussed in Section 3.5.10, as this effect will tend to underestimate the
mass contribution of fly ash.
61
be clearly seen as horizontal bands in the figure. The total time represented by the figure
corresponds to approximately 1.8 hours.
The spore sampler generates a considerable area of tape each week when one considers
that the collection area is effectively the 14 mm slot width multiplied by the 336 mm of
tape exposed through the rotation of the drum. As it was impractical to manually
analyse such large quantities of tape at the magnifications required to distinguish
between individual particles, sections of the tape were selected based on SO2
concentrations measured by the gas monitoring equipment at the site.
Time
Figure 3-5: Low magnification SEM image of tape exposed at Ravensworth site.
The tapes were analysed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) using the University
of Newcastle’s JEOL XL30 using a combination of imaging with back-scattered
electrons and EDX analysis for bulk elemental composition. The detector has a
beryllium window and can detect elements from sodium on in the periodic table. The
images were saved in high definition mode as TIFF files (size 1424 x 1064 pixels) at
standard contrast and brightness settings to reduce between run variability. All images
were saved without the scale bar to maximise the available area for analysis (and avoid
artefacts from analysis of this); a selection of images in each session were also saved
with a scale bar to enable spatial calibration for subsequent image analysis.
62
Superior differentiation against the tape background was found in the image generated
from back scattered electrons (BSE) compared to that from secondary electrons (SE). It
was also found that the tapes did not require carbon coating but could be imaged
adequately as they were. A further advantage of the BSE image is that it is more
sensitive to atomic mass, with the brightness of the image providing some indication of
chemistry: elements with higher atomic mass (and hence larger atomic nuclei) have an
increased likelihood of interaction with the electron beam. For example, biological
particles are dull while sodium chloride crystals are relatively bright. However, because
BSE are generated from further in the sample than SE, resolution is not as good and
particles less than 1 µm are difficult to image adequately. This was not considered to be
a major issue as it is comparable to the particle size cut off of the sampler and the
increased complexity of identifying power station emissions less than 1µm.
Figure 3-6:SE (left) and BSE images of large coal and silica particles.
Carbonaceous material such as coal is not readily identified using the BSE image as the
bulk of such particles does not have sufficient atomic mass to generate a bright enough
signal to be recognised as a particle. This is shown in Figure 3-6 – note how the large
coal particle is almost invisible in the BSE image, while other particles are readily
recognised in both images. However, this was not considered a major limitation as the
images were used primarily for the identification of fly ash rather than to fully
characterise other airborne particulates (and in any case relatively few carbonaceous
particles were observed). Also apparent is the significant reduction in the intensity of
the tape background in the BSE image compared to the SE image.
63
3.5.5 EDX Analysis
As noted earlier, the bombardment of a sample with high energy electrons during SEM
analysis can be used to derive information about its chemical composition. This is
achieved by focussing the 15 kV electron beam on a particular spot of the sample (it
normally scans across the field of view) and collecting the X-ray emission spectrum
over a period of approximately 45 seconds, depending on the count rate (number of X-
rays detected per unit time). This analysis is most suitable for “coarse” particles larger
than 1-2 µm because although the electron beam is approximately 1 µm in diameter, it
penetrates and disperses within the target generating X-rays from a larger area termed
the interaction volume. A 15 kV electron beam will have an interaction volume with a
diameter of around 2 µm, depending on the elemental composition (Goldstein, 2003). A
sample spectrum is shown in Figure 3-7, with the elemental peaks identified and
labelled using Link ISIS software at the time of acquisition.
Counts
Si
5000
4000
3000 Al
2000
K
1000 Cl
S
Na P Ti Fe
0
0 5 10 15 20
Energy (keV)
Figure 3-7: Typical fly ash EDX Spectrum with elemental peaks labelled.
Horizontal axis is the energy of the emitted electrons (characteristic for particular
orbital transitions), while the vertical axis is the count rate.
10,000
2
9,000
N umber of Part i c l es per mm
Mag = 2000x
8,000 Mag = 500x
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
0.1 1 10 100
Bi n Upper Li mi t , µm
Figure 3-8: Particle size distributions for all particles counted for images acquired
at two magnifications, 500x and 2000x. Distributions are expressed as the number
of particles per mm2 reporting to a log series of size bins.
Figure 3-8 shows that the number of particles counted for a particle size greater than 2
µm is essentially independent of the magnification used; however, the images collected
at 500x magnification have inadequate resolution for smaller particles. The images
acquired at 2000x magnification were adequate for coarser particles and allowed
65
particles as small as 0.3 µm to be counted. This was the standard magnification used in
this study to determine mass concentrations. It is interesting to note that a significant
number of particles smaller than 1 µm are collected, although these are expected to be
collected at reduced efficiency.
∑ Mi
C= Equation 3-3
Aa
Q
Ae
Where C = estimated airborne concentration (µg m-3)
Aa = area of tape analysed (m2)
Ae = area of tape exposed in 1 hour (m2)
Q = volume sampled in one hour, corrected for voltage drop (m3)
66
It should be noted that overall particle mass loadings (as opposed to fly ash) are more
difficult to estimate due to the presence of agglomerates and to particle shape. The sizes
determined are in two dimensions only and, while this can be extrapolated to three
dimensions relatively easily for spherical or near spherical particles, this is certainly not
the case for more irregularly shaped particles and for agglomerates. Overall airborne
mass concentrations were not estimated from the images.
The software required a number of parameters to be set up before use. Firstly, a spatial
calibration was required so that the output from the program was in microns rather than
pixels. The software has a function that allows spatial calibration against the scale bar
of the SEM image. Checks against multiple images from a session showed no
significant variation in the calibration were required for a given magnification, even for
67
small changes in the working distance (e.g. if the tape was not quite smooth or the glass
slide slightly tilted).
Additional parameters that were manually selected in the program are in the
Settings\Preferences\Find Objects menu; the maximum number of particles to be
counted was set to 500 and the minimum number of pixels was set to 11. These
settings were chosen based on experience with the maximum number of particles
observed in any one image and to give a minimum particle size of around 0.3 µm, to
avoid artefacts from small numbers of pixels. Note that this lower limit is well below
both the calculated d50 of the spore sampler and the size of particles which can be
readily identified as fly ash.
Particles were then identified using the “Find Objects” command, which allows the user
to specify the brightness threshold between the background (collection tape) and
particles. Increasing the lower threshold can be thought of as “peeling off” the edges of
duller particles. After initial testing, the threshold was set at an arbitrary brightness of
40 (out of a scale of 0-255). This gave a reasonable compromise between separating
nearby objects (which deteriorates with a lower threshold) and accurate estimation of
the particle size. This process is shown in Figure 3-9. Note how with a lower limit of
20, the background is treated as belonging to particles and a large number of spurious
“objects” are found (total number is 128). As the lower limit is increased, these
artefacts are eliminated and the main issues are separation of nearby particles and loss
of small particles (less than 1 µm).
(a) Original image (scale bar = 5 µm) (b) Objects found brightness range 20-255 (128)
68
(c) Objects found brightness range 30-255 (24) (d) Objects found brightness range 40-255 (20)
69
Figure 3-10: SEM image of fine component of hopper ash from Bayswater power
station.
70
3.5.12 Estimation of Uncertainty for Mass Concentrations (Counting
Statistics)
Because it was impractical to measure large numbers of fly ash particles at each time
step, there are uncertainties associated with the limited sample populations which have
been estimated using statistical methods (Hall, 1983). A pragmatic approach has been
developed at the University of Newcastle which uses the number of observations and
the observed variability in the population to estimate the uncertainty using a modified
inverted Edgeworth expansion (Tuyl, 2003). This approach uses parameters which
describe both the spread and skewness of the distribution, and a z score based on the
number of observations to estimate the width of the confidence interval. The pragmatic
adaptation extends this approach using the Student’s t statistic as a more conservative
estimate of the extent of the confidence interval, as below:
UCLa = x + n −1/2 s{t 1-α, n -1 + n −1/2 (γ̂/6)(2z 12-α + 1)} Equation 3-4
71
to the cover slip using small dabs of vacuum grease. Care was taken to keep the grease
away from the impaction point to avoid possible sample contamination. The back-up
filter was a 47 mm diameter cellulose acetate filter with a pore size of 0.10 µm
(Millipore type VC); this was used in preference to track etched filters due to potential
issues with pore blockages.
The molecular weight of the sebacic acid ester is 426.68 and it has a density of 0.912
and a boiling point of 256°C (Weast et al., 1986).
72
3.6.3 Conditional Sampling Methodology
As discussed above, SO2 was used as a plume indicator to investigate the chemistry of
various aerosol size fractions in the presence and absence of power station impacts. For
this approach to be valid, the power stations need to be the dominant local SO2 source;
this will be discussed using historical data in Chapter 4.
The 10 minute SO2 concentration at Ravensworth was used as a conditional switch for
the power supply to the vacuum pump for the impactor, with a threshold value of 20
ppb. There were two modes of operation – “SO2 high” (i.e. >20 ppb) and “SO2 low”
(<=20 ppb) – which allow sized fractionated aerosol samples to be collected under
conditions where the power station influence was expected to be greatest and least. The
threshold of 20 ppb was selected to provide both a significant deviation from the
background and reasonable run time for sampling under “SO2 high” conditions over a
period of one month. The base case for comparison was obtained by sampling in “SO2
low” mode for between one and two days. 8 sets of samples were collected under each
mode of operation over the period August 2002 to June 2003, as shown in Table 3-7.
The cascade impactor was mounted at the south-western edge of the gas shed roof with
the inlet approximately 2.5 m above ground level. The inlet was directed away from the
shed and a short silicone tube was used in most runs so that the sample point was not
directly over the shed roof but in “free air”. A test conducted to see whether particles
were being retained in this tube indicated that only particles large than 10 µm were
73
collected (by washing the tube out with ethanol and measuring the particle size using a
Malvern Mastersizer). The suction from the cascade impactor (approximately 2.5
metres long) was also silicone tubing which was passed through the hole in the gas shed
wall for the air conditioning unit to the vacuum pump inside. The last few runs were
conducted without the inlet tubing to see whether any noticeable effects were observed.
The samples from individual runs and stages were analysed using PIXE and PIGE at
ANSTO (Cohen et al., 1996) for multiple elements to enable reconstitution of the
aerosol. It was not possible to analyse for some key elements using these techniques
e.g. C, H, O and N. Note that it was also not possible to measure individual masses
before and after exposure due to the need to use a small amount of grease to secure the
filter substrate to the impaction surface. A photograph of the samples in the sample
holder “stick” is shown in Figure 3-11. Reference samples for calibration purposes are
in the large holders at the left of the stick, while the cascade impactor samples are in the
smaller holders to the right. This stick was inserted into the IBA machine where the
samples were individually bombarded by protons with an energy of 2.6 MeV, and the
X-Ray and gamma-ray spectra measured. The beam had a diameter of 4 mm for the
first group of analysis in September 2002 and 3 mm in June 2003.
74
Figure 3-11: Photograph of IBA stick showing reference materials (left) and
samples from cascade impactor (smaller holders on right).
Figure 3-12: Typical PIXE spectrum showing peaks for various elements.
PIGME spectra were also obtained but most of the indicated concentrations were not
used in subsequent analysis due to comparatively high uncertainties, as discussed in the
results section.
The issue of particle charging was addressed through careful examination of the
operating manuals as well as contact with TSI representatives. Because the NAS will
only collect positively charged particles, it is important to understand the charge
distribution of particles in the air. The equilibrium charge distribution is governed by
well known rules and is shown in Table 3-8.
76
Percent of Particles Carrying Np Elementary Charge Units
Dp(µm) Np=–6 –5 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6
0.20 0.05 0.53 3.40 12.38 25.49 29.66 19.51 7.26 1.53 0.18 0.01
0.40 0.27 1.14 3.60 8.54 15.24 20.46 20.65 15.66 8.93 3.83 1.24 0.03 0.05
0.60 1.21 3.00 6.19 10.53 14.82 17.25 16.60 13.20 8.69 4.73 2.13 0.79 0.24
0.80 2.42 4.64 7.71 11.12 13.90 15.06 14.15 11.53 8.15 4.99 2.65 1.22 0.49
1.00 3.56 5.84 8.53 11.13 12.96 13.45 12.46 10.30 7.59 5.00 2.93 1.54 0.92
Consultation with TSI confirmed that the ambient aerosol does not possess the
equilibrium charge distribution due to many influences such as thunderstorms, humidity
and the effect of sunlight. However, it was also indicated that particle composition has
no effect on charge distribution. It was therefore decided to restore the equilibrium
distribution by passing the classified aerosol through a TSI Model 3079 Neutraliser,
which restores the equilibrium charge distribution through exposure to particles ionised
by a low intensity Kr-85 radioactive source.
Figure 3-13: NAS set-up showing cascade impactor and neutraliser on inlet.
The sampler set-up is shown in Figure 3-13. The equipment was connected using short
sections of silicone tube on the outside of the connecting tubes, which were butted up
against each other to minimise potential losses of particles in the sampling system. The
flowrate through the NAS is adjustable between 0 and 1.5 LPM. A flowrate of 1 LPM
was selected because this gave good collection at 85 nm (TSI, 2001) and stage 4 of the
impactor has a cut size of approximately 0.4 µm at this flowrate.
77
The NAS is supplied with standard electrodes 25 mm and 9 mm in diameter. However,
after tests at CSIRO Lucas Heights Laboratories using the 25 mm electrode, it was
decided to have a smaller electrode fabricated which was 6 mm in diameter to maximise
the deposition density. Samples were collected on 3 mm TEM grids with a thin
polymer film. The grids were attached to the NAS electrode using small pieces of
Sellotape to ensure the grids did not become dislodged during sampling. Samples were
collected at times when the SO2 was high as per the conditional sampling with the
cascade impactor to determine the impact of emissions on the ultrafine particle
component. This involved using the conditional power supply to operate the NAS at
preset parameters corresponding to 10,000 V and a flowrate of 1 LPM.
As the unit was not weather proof, it was mounted inside the gas shed underneath the air
conditioning unit, with a short section of silicone tubing (0.60 m) passing out through
the wall and down one of the support legs of the air conditioner. It was decided not to
sample from the gas shed roof due to the extra length of tube required (at least 1.5 m)
and the resulting dead space in the system and potential for greater particle retention.
Reference samples were also collected from the tail-pipe emissions of one of the
University’s diesel vehicles, under both idle and start-up conditions.
Analysis of the samples was firstly conducted at the University of Newcastle on a JEOL
JEM-1200EXII TEM, which captures images as negatives on film. These images were
scanned at a local photography shop to convert them into high resolution JPEG files to
facilitate image analysis. These preliminary sessions were used to confirm that
adequate sample density had been obtained for further analysis at the University of New
South Wales on a Phillips CM200 TEM with an EDAX DX-4 for EDX analysis and
digital image acquisition.
78
4 HISTORICAL DATA & TAPM MODELLING
79
The strong covariance between much of the data in Figure 4-1 indicates that the power
stations are indeed the dominant sources of both species for much of the time. Further,
the fact that there is very little data above the NPI data line confirms that the power
stations are indeed the dominant SO2 source in the area. Figure 4-1 also indicates that
there are other significant local NOx sources besides the power stations. Approximately
10% of the observations had significant NOx concentrations without the corresponding
SOx concentrations indicative of power station origin (NOx > 75 ppb and SOx < 50 ppb).
Likely candidates are highway/railway traffic and emissions from haul trucks and
blasting at nearby mines.
14
12
Mean 10 Minute SO2, ppb
10
Local Time
Figure 4-3 shows the measured SO2 concentrations over a three day period which
includes a significant SO2 event. Events on individual days are much more irregular
than the patterns shown in Figure 4-2, tending to be shorter and more extreme, and
lasting anywhere from 10 minutes to several hours. The maximum concentration
80
observed in the dataset was 341 ppb, although this was an extreme event – only 21 of
the 50,000 10 minute observations exceeded the hourly National Environmental
Protection Measure (NEPM) standard of 200 ppb.
250
200
10 Minute SO2, ppb
150
100
50
0
15/08/01 15/08/01 16/08/01 16/08/01 17/08/01 17/08/01 18/08/01
0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00
Figure 4-3: 10 minute SO2 data for sample 3-day period showing nature of
individual events.
Table 4-1: 10 minute SO2 concentration statistics and estimated dilution factors.
a b
Statistic Value Dilution Est. Fly Ash
-3
(ppb) µg m
Per ppb SO2 1 350,000 0.03
Mean 4.5 78,000 0.14
th
90 Percentile 8 44,000 0.24
th
99 Percentile 61 5,700 1.9
Maximum 341 1,000 10.7
a
Assumed stack concentration of 350 ppm SO2
b
Assuming: primary particulate mass only same dilution,
-3
equivalent stack concentration at 400K of 8 mg m
81
These dilution factors can also be used to extrapolate potential concentrations of power
station primary particulate emissions based on an assumed stack emission rate of 8 mg
m-3 of TSP (also provided by Macquarie Generation). This ignores the effects of sulphur
dioxide oxidation and particle deposition and gravitational settling but is useful as a
preliminary indication of potential concentrations, and is similar to the earlier study
which assessed the impact of Liddell emissions prior to fabric filters (Jakeman and
Simpson, 1987). Note that the “fly ash” estimates are for TSP and approximately 50%
of emissions are assumed to be PM10 (Rothe, 2003).
The mean value of PM10 recorded at the site over the same monitoring period was 25 µg
m-3, which suggests that the contribution of power station primary particulate emissions
may be relatively low compared to other sources.
2000
(6 day c yc l e)
60
2001
50
40
-3
30
PM 1 0 , µg m
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 4-4. Potential correlation between daily average SO2 concentration and
corresponding 24 hour gravimetric PM10 concentration.
82
While there is considerable scatter in the data (R squared is 0.094), there appears to be a
general increasing trend in the line of best fit. The equation for the line of best fit is:
Statistical checks on the significance of the slope indicate that there is a significant non-
zero slope term at a 95% confidence interval; in other words there is a significant
correlation between SO2 and PM10. This is consistent with the absence of data in the
bottom right of the plot. The low R squared indicates that unidentified other factors are
significant in determining PM10, and that the regression therefore has comparatively
poor predictive power. The calculated slope is 0.92 µg m-3 per ppb SO2 with a 95%
confidence interval from 0.39 to 1.46 (see Appendix D for full details including residual
plots). This effect is much greater than that expected from primary particulate
emissions of 0.03 µg m-3 per ppb SO2, as shown in the dilution calculations in Table
4-1.
It is suggested that this correlation is due to a sampling artefact caused by the collection
or absorption of acidic species such as sulphuric acid, SO2 or NOx. This is consistent
with past observations that glass fibre filters can absorb SO2 and NOx due to filter
alkalinity (Chow and Watson, 1998). This was investigated by calculating the mass
concentration of SO2 for each ppb, based on the molecular weight of SO2 (64.06)
compared to that of air (28.96) assuming a density of 1.177 kg m-3 at 300 K (Rogers and
Mayhew). The calculated mass concentration of SO2 is 2.6 µg m-3 per ppb; this is
approximately three times the estimated effect of 0.9 µg m-3 SO2 per ppb from the
correlation above. A possible hypothesis is therefore that around one third of the SO2
passing through the high volume filters is in fact captured and reports as particulate
mass. If NOx is also absorbed, a smaller proportion of the SO2 would be captured.
Thus a mechanism of partial absorption of acid gases by the filter is consistent with the
observed relationship between gravimetric PM10 and SO2 concentrations observed in the
data. However, it should be stressed that there are other significant and highly variable
sources of PM10 that obscure this potential relationship, and indeed contribute most of
the recorded mass (reflected in the significant intercept of 20.9 µg m-3).
83
4.1.5 Concentrations at Ravensworth Compared to Other Sites
Data was also obtained from Macquarie Generation for routine monitoring of SO2 and
NOx at four sites in the Upper Hunter Valley: the Ravensworth site discussed above, a
site to the north of the stations on Lake Liddell, and two sites to the west of the stations
at Mt Arthur North and Muswellbrook. Figure 4-5 shows the distribution of results
from monitoring data for 10 minute SO2 concentrations for the 2001/2002 monitoring
year at the four sites, expressed as the cumulative percent of values falling within a
logarithmic series of bins. The data indicate that the Lake Liddell monitoring site
experiences the fewest SO2 events, which is not surprising as it is in an unfavourable
direction compared to the prevailing airflows (being to the north). The Mt Arthur North
site experiences the most impact from the power station emissions; however, it was not
considered suitable for this project due to its immediate proximity to the Mt Arthur
North mine, which was under construction during the sampling period. The
Ravensworth site is the next most heavily impacted site, and was preferred to the
Muswellbrook site for this reason.
100%
Less impacted
95%
C umul at i v e % of D at a
90%
85%
More impacted
80%
75%
70%
Muswellbrook
65%
Ravensworth
60% Mt Arthur North
55% Lake Liddell Rec Area
50%
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Figure 4-5: Cumulative 10 minute SO2 data from available monitoring sites
(2001/2002 monitoring year).
84
2. Diurnal variations in concentrations indicate that atmospheric stability is critical
to the timing of SO2 events. Emissions accumulate during still overnight
conditions and are brought to ground in the morning through mixing caused by
solar heating, as proposed in earlier studies (Chambers et al., 1982).
3. Mass concentrations of power station particulate emissions at the monitoring site
can be estimated from the observed dilution of SO2 from stack, with a 99th
percentile value of 1.9 µg m-3. This is considerably less than the 25 µg m-3 mean
PM10 at the site.
4. The Ravensworth monitoring site is the most suitable of the existing Macquarie
Generation sites, experiencing more frequent and severe impacts from power
station emissions than the nearest urban monitoring site at Muswellbrook.
Detailed model validation was not regarded as a key objective for this work, as TAPM
has already been assessed in a number of literature studies (Hurley et al., 2001; Hurley
et al., 2003; Luhar and Hurley, 2003). The emphasis in the current context is rather on
understanding dispersion patterns and determining expected relative concentrations at
various locations.
85
• Grid arrangement: TAPM uses a nested grid arrangement, which enables fine
resolution at the innermost grid but in the context of larger scale topography
and synoptic conditions through the overlying grids which are at coarser
resolution. Grids were staggered at 10, 3 and 1 km spacing; the inner grid
covering an area 40 km by 40 km. The grid centre was located at latitude -32
deg -23.5 min, longitude 150 deg 58 min, close to Bayswater and Liddell power
stations. Both Singleton and Muswellbrook fall within the inner grid.
• Pollution: the model was run in a tracer mode, which treats all species (including
particulate matter) as gases, with no atmospheric reactions or deposition.
• Emission rates: were assumed constant in time, based on volume emission rates
calculated from source parameters provided by CSIRO (Physick, 2002) and
concentrations provided by Macquarie Generation (Rothe, 2003). Note that
these volume rates are based on full load operation and will differ from actual
rates due to the number of units operating at any one time. Similarly, actual SO2
and particulate emission rates will vary depending on unit load, fuel properties
and emission control device performance. In general, Bayswater is more fully
loaded than Liddell, while the fuel at Liddell is lower in sulphur. Conversely,
on-line opacity monitors indicate that Liddell particulate emissions are higher
than Bayswater (Rothe, 2003). However, the simplified emission rates give a
good match with NPI emissions (see Appendix H), and previous studies have
indicated that the plumes normally merge around 10 km from the stations
(Carras et al., 1992). Minimal impact is therefore expected on the predictions of
relative concentrations.
• Assumed emission concentrations are as per Table 4-1:
o Particulate matter emissions: based on a TSP emission rate of 8 mg m-3
at 400K; about 50% of this material is assumed to be PM10 (Rothe,
2003).
o SO2 emissions: based on a 350 ppm emission concentration.
• Scenarios: 12 monthly runs were conducted covering the period from July 2002
through to June 2003 i.e. the main sampling periods at Ravensworth.
86
Figure 4-6: Overview of study area showing location of monitoring site, power
station stacks and urban areas Muswellbrook and Singleton in salmon.
A schematic of the area encompassed by the inner grid is shown in Figure 4-6. This is a
useful check of the co-ordinates for the monitoring site and power station stacks, as the
main roads and water features are shown in sufficient detail to confirm that the sites are
indeed correctly located, and that the nearby urban areas of Singleton and
Muswellbrook fall within the inner grid. This schematic was used as a base map for the
concentration plots below, produced using the Surfer program.
87
Figure 4-7: Average monthly SO2 concentrations for the inner grid (40 km x 40
km) for period July 2002 to June 2003.
The plots show the effect of the predominant NW/SE wind directions throughout the
year, as well as seasonal impacts. NW flows are more influential in the winter months,
with September and October showing higher concentrations to the SE of the stations. In
contrast, SE flows have a greater impact in summer, with higher concentrations to the
88
NW of the stations evident in the plots for January through to March. Dispersion
appears most variable during spring and autumn, as shown by the plots for
November/December and April/May. The plots indicate that the concentrations
experienced at Ravensworth are generally higher than the nearby urban areas of
Muswellbrook and Singleton, with Muswellbrook expected to be the more significantly
impacted. Other areas are expected to be more significantly impacted, especially
around 4-6 km to the NE and SW of the stacks.
Plots were also prepared for the second highest hourly concentration, which is
approximately equivalent to the 99.9 percentile value (i.e. the concentration exceeded
by only 0.1% of values) given that there are 720 hourly data values in a 30 day month.
This is a slightly more robust statistic than the absolute highest concentration (Hurley et
al., 2001). These plots showed much greater variation in dispersion patterns, as shown
in Figure 4-8. This is not surprising as the maximum concentration experienced at a
given grid location becomes quite event specific, whereas the average concentrations
are more indicative of longer term effects.
Figure 4-8: Sample plots of second highest SO2 concentration over inner grid area.
The model predictions were also compared with the data from the gas monitoring
equipment to examine the short term performance of the model. This is a relatively
severe test of the model performance as it is generally accepted that:
89
locations; and (2) the models are reasonably reliable in estimating the
magnitude of highest concentrations occurring sometime, somewhere within
an area. For example, errors in highest estimated concentrations of ±10 to 40
percent are found to be typical, i.e., certainly well within the often quoted
factor-of-two accuracy that has long been recognized for these models.
However, estimates of concentrations that occur at a specific time and site,
are poorly correlated with actually observed concentrations and are much
less reliable.” (USEPA, 2003a)
Figure 4-9 shows the hourly SO2 concentrations predicted by TAPM compared to the
corresponding measured concentrations for two selected months. The monitoring data
is derived from the 10 minute average concentrations to match TAPM’s hour-ending
convention i.e. each data point is the average of the preceding 6 observations up to and
including the hour in question. The x-axis has been marked at 24 hour intervals to
examine the timing of events. It is interesting to note that the monitoring data has a
significant zero error through much of the month in the second plot – this appeared to
be an intermittent problem with the monitoring equipment as offsets were noted in the
data for six of the months examined.
200
180 Monitoring Data
H our l y Ave r a g e SO 2 , p p b
90
200
180 Monitoring Data
H ourl y Ave ra g e SO 2 , p p b
160 TAPM Predictions
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
H our (0 = mi dni ght on 1 Feb 03)
In general, the TAPM predictions agree well with the observations in terms of the
timing of events, indicating that the model is phenomenologically correct – where both
data sets indicate an event, the timing of the event is very similar. However, at a finer
level of detail, there are significant discrepancies in whether a significant event is
reflected in both data sets, as well as in the concentrations observed. This is explored
further in Figure 4-10, which compares the same data in Figure 4-9 but this time with
the monitoring data plotted against the TAPM predictions.
150 150
2 :1 Fe b 0 3 2 :1 Se p 0 2
130 130
110 110
Moni to ri ng D at a
Mo ni to ri ng D at a
90 90
70 70
1 :2 1:2
50 50
30 30
10 10
-10 -10
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
TAPM Predi c ti o ns (hrl y SO 2 , ppb) TA PM Predi c t i o ns (hrl y SO 2 , ppb)
The dotted lines in Figure 4-10 are show the data which fall inside the “factor of two”
accuracy limits referred to above; these plots suggest that the paired spatial and
91
temporal comparisons are too stringent, which is not surprising in light of the USEPA
comments above. There are a range of alternative measures in the literature which have
been used to assess model accuracy (Ziomas et al., 1998; Liu et al., 2000; Sivacoumar
et al., 2000; Biswas et al., 2001; Held et al., 2003), but detailed model assessment is
outside the scope of the current work as the emphasis is rather on the distribution
patterns and relative concentrations at sites of interest.
10000
TAPM - Rav
# of hrly concentrations>C
OBS - Rav
1000 TAPM - Mbk
TAPM - Sing
100
10
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Hourly SO2 Concentration
A simple method for comparing the unpaired observations and model predictions is to
plot the cumulative concentration distributions, as shown in Figure 4-11. This plot
indicates reasonable agreement between the two data sets across a wide range of
concentrations, although there is some deviation at the concentration extremes. The
disparity at low concentrations is attributed to the zero errors referred to above, while it
would appear that TAPM tends to overpredict the severity of higher concentration
events.
Figure 4-11(a) also indicates that Muswellbrook and Singleton are expected to
experience less impact from the emissions than the Ravensworth site, with TAPM
predictions for these sites well below the Ravensworth cases. TAPM predictions for the
relative concentrations at the three locations are summarised in Table 4-2, together with
92
the number of hours SO2 was expected to exceed 20 ppb (the conditional sampling
threshold).
Table 4-2: Relative SO2 concentrations at Ravensworth and nearby urban areas
predicted by TAPM (2002/2003).
This data confirms that the Ravensworth site experiences greater impacts from the
power station emissions than either Muswellbrook or Singleton, with higher SO2
concentrations and a longer exposure to concentrations over 20 ppb (still rather a
moderate event considering the NEPM hourly limit is 200 ppb). The model predicts
that Muswellbrook is more frequently impacted than Singleton, although the higher SO2
events at Singleton appear slightly more pronounced than at Muswellbrook both in
terms of the maximum concentrations observed and the average SO2 for events above
20 ppb (probably due to reduced dispersion in winter down valley drainage events).
Table 4-3 summarises approximate scaling factors for SO2 concentrations based on the
TAPM predictions in Table 4-2.
Table 4-3: Scaling factors for various SO2 concentration parameters to allow
Ravensworth results to be extrapolated to nearby urban areas.
10000
TAPM - Rav
100
10
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Table 4-4 summarises the maximum percentiles expected at the Ravensworth site for
both SO2 and TSP based on the TAPM modelling. The 99th percentile value for the
contribution to TSP is 1.6 µg m-3 (comparable to the 1.9 µg m-3 in Table 4-1 based on
2001/2002 data), while the practical maximum or 99.9th percentile is 4.6 µg m-3. The
ratio of TSP to SO2 is 0.0304 µg m-3 per ppb, while the ratio of PM10 to SO2 is 0.0152
µg m-3 per ppb. The data in Table 4-4 also confirms that TAPM appears to be
overpredicting SO2 at the site at high concentrations as noted above, giving conservative
estimates of the contribution of power station primary particulates to aerosol mass.
94
4.2.5 Summary
TAPM has been used to assess the dispersion patterns and relative concentrations at the
Ravensworth monitoring site in the context of the nearby urban areas of Singleton and
Muswellbrook. It is believed that TAPM is modelling the expected SO2 concentrations
reasonably well, with good agreement in the timing of events. Individual events are not
always well correlated although this is perhaps an unrealistic expectation of the model.
The temporally dissociated correlation of concentrations shows reasonable agreement,
although TAPM does appear to over-predict extreme events. The Ravensworth site was
confirmed as a suitable mid impact site for assessments, with a predicted 99th percentile
contribution of power station PM10 emissions to ambient particulate matter of 0.8 µg m-
3
, and a maximum (99.9th percentile) contribution of 2.3 µg m-3. Maximum power
station derived concentrations at Singleton and Ravensworth are expected to be of the
order of 50 to 70% of these values based on relative SO2 concentrations from the TAPM
modelling, although it should be recognised that these estimates are based on steady
state emissions and short term variability in emissions adds some uncertainty to these
estimates.
95
5 RESULTS
Edge of Edge of
Tape Tape
Y
Images
X
Time
Figure 5-1: Schematic showing location of the 5 images (not to scale) used for
mass determinations; grey area indicates slot dimensions (14x0.5 mm).
96
Size distribution data were generated using Image Tool as a check on the evenness of
deposition across the width of the tape. Each line in the plots in Figure 5-2 below
represents the distribution of all identified particles at a given X position on the tape,
calculated by summing the number of particles in each size bin over the various time
steps (and normalising in the case of plots (a) and (c)). While there is some variation in
the numbers of particles counted at the different positions, there is no evidence of any
systematic bias. The drop off in the number of particles observed below 0.5 µm is
attributed to a combination of reduced collection efficiency at smaller particle sizes and
the difficulty of adequately imaging these particles.
40% 200
X C o -o r d in a te X C o -o r d in ate
180
35% -16500
30% -14500
140
-12500
25% -12500
120 -10500
-10500
20% 100 -8500
-8500
80
15%
60
10%
40
5% 20
0
0%
<0.5 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.0 2.0-4.0 4.0-8.0 8.0-16 >16
<0.5 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.0 2.0-4.0 4.0-8.0 8.0-16 >16
Size Bin (microns)
Size Bin (microns)
(a) Job 23 (5 time steps, 25 images) (b) Job 23 (5 time steps, 25 images)
35% 180
X C o -o r d in a te X C o -o r d in a te
160
30% -16500
-16500
Number in Size Bin (total)
140
Number % in Size Bin
-14500
25% -14500
120 -12500
-12500
20% 100 -10500
-10500
-8500
15% -8500 80
60
10%
40
5%
20
0% 0
<0.5 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.0 2.0-4.0 4.0-8.0 8.0-16 >16 <0.5 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.0 2.0-4.0 4.0-8.0 8.0-16 >16
(c) Job 24 (3 time steps, 15 images) (d) Job 24 (3 time steps, 15 images)
Figure 5-2: Size distributions of particles at different positions across tape. Plots
(a) and (c) are normalised number distributions; plots (b) and (d) are raw particle
number data (X-co-ordinate refers to stage position in microns).
98
relatively dull image due to lower average atomic mass. The majority of the particles
are comparatively bright and irregular – these are believed to be derived from crustal
material.
Figure 5-5 shows an image containing several large crystalline particles. Three groups
of commonly occurring crystalline particles were identified using a combination of
particle morphology and EDX chemistry:
• NaCl: bright, often cubic, strong Na and Cl peaks. Particle size is sometimes
quite large (over 10 µm) which suggests local sources (for example irrigation or
water spraying for dust control in nearby mines) are responsible for some of the
salt crystals observed.
• CaSO4: slightly duller, elongated – columnar, sometimes pill shaped, strong Ca
and S peaks
• Dark Crystals: dull image, variable morphology, low signal to noise ratio with
no major elemental peak. The spot used for EDX analysis “drilled” a hole in
these crystals, indicating relatively poor thermal stability – this is consistent with
the low melting and boiling points of ammonium nitrate, which are 170°C and
210°C respectively (Weast et al., 1986). The absence of a sulphur peak
indicates these crystals are not ammonium sulphate.
99
NH4NO3?
NH4NO3?
NaCl
NaCl
CaSO4
CaSO4
Table 5-1 summarises the key particle categories along with a collage of typical images
and a sample X-ray spectra. It should be noted that categories are not included for two
common types of atmospheric particles, ammonium salts (nitrate and sulphate) and soot.
These particles were not identified in the images due to a combination of the size
limitations of SEM imaging and the analysis limitations of EDX chemistry (only
elements from Na on can be identified). The potential contribution of these species to
ultrafine particles is discussed in Section 5.3.
Table 5-1: Key (coarse) particle categories identified using morphology and
spectral data.
Particle Class, Typical SEM Images and Details. Typical EDX Spectrum
Crustal Material (soil, overburden)
2500
2000
1500
1000
S
P
500 Si
Na
0
0 5 10 15 20
Energy (keV)
Morphology: angular.
Brightness: dull overall, though often with bright patches Main peaks: Al, Si, Fe, S. High
due to mineral inclusions or adhering particles. noise to signal ratio.
101
5.1.3 Selection of Events for Mass Assessments
Events were selected for SEM investigation primarily on the basis of the 10 minute SO2
data, although a number of high SO2 events were unsampled due to equipment failures.
The periods selected are shown in Table 5-2, along with the corresponding maximum
10 minute SO2 concentration. It is believed that these data reflect the “worst case”
scenarios in that they are from areas of the tape corresponding to highest SO2
measurements over the 8 months study period (concentrating on winter 2002). Each
event is designated by the job number of the SEM session in which it was analysed.
Table 5-2 also shows the number of time steps for which images were acquired as well
as the number of images analysed with image tool (5 per time step with the exception of
Job 30 which covered a 24 hour period) and the number of particles identified as fly
ash. Note that the discussion of results will be largely restricted to the Ravensworth
data, as very limited data was obtained from the Blackmans Flat sampling.
5.1.4.1 Morphology
As shown in Table 5-1 above, it is believed that most fly ash can be readily identified
on the basis of morphology alone, as there were no other sources of highly spherical
particles. The closest alternative match for such particles would be biological, although
these are not normally perfect spheres and have a much duller image due to lower
average atomic mass. The particles appear to be mainly solid with a uniform brightness
which is consistent with previous findings (Fisher et al., 1978). A few particles were
observed with what appeared to be gas bubbles within (darker rounded areas).
102
Checks on the EDX spectra of particles suspected as being fly ash indicated strong
aluminium and silicon peaks with small peaks from other elements such as sulphur,
iron, potassium and calcium, consistent with literature findings (Mamane et al., 1986).
5.1.4.2 Roundness
As discussed previously, most fly ash particles are expected to be close to spherical due
to their formation at combustion temperatures. Image Tool calculates a widely used
measure of the sphericity of the particles termed “roundness” from the measurements of
the object as per Equation 5-1. This measure provides a simple indication of how close
the object is to a perfect circle: if the roundness is equal to 1, then the object is a perfect
circle; as the roundness decreases from 1, the object departs from a circular form.
4πA
R= Equation 5-1
P2
Where: R = roundness
A = area of the object
P = perimeter of the object
Figure 5-6 shows the roundness values plotted against the mean feret diameter for the
fly ash particles found as individual particles. The roundness values have a mean of
0.96 and a standard deviation of 0.09. Almost a third of the objects have a calculated
roundness greater than 1, and all of these are relatively small particles. This is
suspected to be a result of the relatively small number of pixels associated with the
smaller particles, due to a slight overestimation of the area or underestimation of the
perimeter. It is likely that this is due to a known difficulty with the method used by
Image Tool – the programs Help files acknowledge that this “measurement tends to
produce a slight over-estimate of the object's area”. The objects with significantly
lower roundness are a combination of slightly elongated but rounded particles and
spherical particles with some surface irregularities – a number of particles had wispy
material or angular protrusions. However, as the plot indicates, the vast majority of the
fly ash particles were close to spherical as expected.
103
1.4
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Figure 5-6: Fly ash roundness values from Image Tool as a function of particle
size.
The size distribution of the particles identified as fly ash is shown in Figure 5-7. Note
that this plot includes both the single fly ash particles and the equivalent diameters of
fly ash in agglomerates. The fly ash particles identified had a mean feret diameter of
1.62 µm with a standard deviation of 0.99 µm. Most of the particles had diameters
between 0.5 and 3.0 µm, although there was a significant tail to the distribution,
reflected in the comparatively high volume (or mass) mean diameter. The smallest
particles identified as fly ash were around 0.4 µm, although this was right at the edge of
image resolution and it was not always possible to be certain for such small particles
104
(however, the mass contribution of these smaller particles is expected to be minor). The
largest particle identified as fly ash had a diameter of 6.1 µm.
Cumulat i ve Mas s %
Mas s % in I nterv al
Arithmetic Mean 1.62µm, 70% 70%
40%
SD 0.99µm 15% 60%
60%
Volume Mean 3.71µm
30% 50% 50%
20% 5% 20%
10%
10% 10%
0% 0% 0% 0%
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
Figure 5-7: Number and mass distributions of fly ash particles identified from
Burkard Spore sampler tapes at Ravensworth.
5.1.4.4 Brightness
300
Mean B ri ghtnes s (0- 255)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0.1 1 10
Figure 5-8: Average brightness of single fly ash particles as a function of size.
Figure 5-8 shows the mean brightness of the individual fly ash particles as determined
by Image Tool. While there is considerable scatter in the data, there is a clear
correlation between increasing particle size and increasing brightness. It is believed that
this is due to the interaction of the electron beam with the particle – for larger objects a
15kV electron beam has an interaction volume of around 2 µm in diameter, depending
on the elemental composition (Goldstein, 2003). Particles smaller than the normal
105
interaction volume will have less influence on the electron beam – the reduced number
of backscattered electrons will be reflected in a duller image with less brightness than a
larger particle of similar composition. Composition was also noted to have an effect,
with relatively bright particles containing higher atomic mass elements, notably iron.
25
SO2, ppb
20
15
10
5
0
20 10 15 20 00 05 10
Count of FA
15
10
0.4 10 15 20 00 05 10
-3
FA ug m
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
10 15 20 00 05 10
Time (Hour of Day)
The number of fly ash particles identified correlates well with the SO2 measurements,
while the mass concentration shows more noisy behaviour. This is due to the influence
of a few comparatively large (4-5 µm) particles, which have a substantial impact on
mass due to volume being proportional to the cube of diameter, and possibly also to the
fact that this Job only acquired 3 images at each time step instead of the normal 5 due to
machine time limitations. However, the data does confirm that SO2 measurements are a
106
useful method to identify times when the contribution of power station emissions is
likely to be most significant.
The first source of uncertainty was assessed in Chapter 3 and estimated to contribute a
1.2% uncertainty on the mass determination. The second source - basing the mass
calculation on spherical particles only - was also discussed in Chapter 3 and is
considered to result in a slight underestimation; this bias is estimated at 5% or less. The
third group of sources will be discussed in the current section while the uncertainty due
to counting statistics will be covered in Section 5.1.7.
107
Table 5-3: Correction for reduced volume sampled due to varying flowrates.
90%
80%
Col l ec t i on Eff i c i enc y
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Figure 5-10: Reduced collection efficiency data (after Rubow et al., 1987).
108
The impact of collection efficiency on the mass estimates was determined by adjusting
the mass of each particle by a weighting factor depending on the collection efficiency
for particles of that size, and then summing for each time step to determine the adjusted
mass concentration. This approach is very sensitive to the value of the d50 used, bur
relatively insensitive to the shape of the efficiency curve. A sensitivity analysis was
conducted using the range of d50 values corresponding to the observed flowrate range of
7.3 to 9.5 LPM for the expected √St50 of 0.64, as well as the extremely conservative
value of 0.80. Plots of the adjusted mass versus the unadjusted mass together with the
magnitude of the adjustment for the 4 resulting cases shown in Table 5-4 are shown in
Figure 5-11.
0.50 0.50
-3
-3
0.30 0.30
0.25 0.25
0.20 0.20
0.15 0.15
0.10 0.10
0.05 0.05
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
-3 -3
Un adjus ted Mas s Es t i m at e, µgm Un adjus ted Mas s Es t i m at e, µgm
(a) Q = 9.5 LPM, √Stk = 0.64 (b) Q = 7.3 LPM, √Stk = 0.64
109
0.60 0.60
-3
-3
d50 = 1.02µm d50 = 1.16µm
Adjus t ed Mas s Es t i m at e, µgm
0.30 0.30
0.20 0.20
0.10 0.10
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
-3 -3
Un adjus ted Mas s Es t i m at e, µgm Un adjus ted Mas s Es t i m at e, µgm
(c) Q = 9.5 LPM, √Stk = 0.80 (d) Q = 7.3 LPM, √Stk = 0.80
Figure 5-11: Sensitivity analysis of mass estimates to √St50 and flowrate.
Figure 5-11 (a) and (b) confirm that the reduction in collection efficiency has only a
minor impact on the mass estimates when the expected value of √St50 is used, with the
highest mass estimates increasing by up to 5.5% at the lowest flows. Absolute increases
are similar across the full range of mass estimates, although the relative increases are
naturally much higher for lower values. Figure 5-11 (c) and (d) indicate that if the √St50
is considerably higher than expected, the mass estimates could underestimate the mass
by up to 37%. Note that this can be considered to be a very conservative upper limit, as
the √St50 is expected to be much lower than in these cases and the flowrates applicable
to the individual mass determinations were generally higher than 7.3 LPM as shown in
Table 5-3. A more realistic estimate of error from this source would therefore be of the
order of 5-10% for the highest mass estimate. This error has not been factored into the
mass estimates due to uncertainty over the basic assumptions of the actual d50 and the
shape of the collection efficiency curve. It will be shown in the next section that this
error is small compared to the uncertainty arising from counting statistics.
110
The error bars shown in the top plot correspond to the 95% confidence intervals on the
individual mass estimates determined according to the methodology outlined in Section
3.5.12 and Equation 3-4. The comparatively large upper limits (up to 3 times the
observed value) reflect the highly skewed mass distribution shown in Figure 5-7 – a few
large particles are responsible for most of the mass (see also Figure 5-9). The number of
particles generally increases with the estimated mass, although there is considerable
scatter in the data. Similarly there is a weak correlation between the SO2 concentration
and the estimated mass concentration.
1.2
Ravensworth
"Coarse" FA (ug m )
Estimated Mass of
-3
1.0
Blackmans Flat
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Number of Fly Ash
Particles Counted
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
250
Interpolated 10
200
min SO2, ppb
150
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Observation (sorted by mass)
Figure 5-12: Estimated mass concentration and number of fly ash particles
observed. Each “observation” represents a mass determination at a particular
time step; sorted in the figure to explore potential relationships.
The maximum estimated mass concentration at Ravensworth was 0.42 µg m-3 (with a
95% confidence interval of 0.40-1.12 µg m-3). The data from Blackmans Flat is very
limited but similar in magnitude to the values obtained from the sampling at
Ravensworth, although greater numbers of smaller fly ash particles were observed as
111
shown in Figure 5-12. The highest mass estimate was 0.43 µg m-3, with a 95%
confidence interval of 0.03-0.80 µg m-3.
It should also be noted that the higher concentrations of fly ash do not occur at the same
time as high PM events due to the underlying meteorology – i.e. the plume comes to
ground due to mixing of a formerly stable layer whereas high PM events are associated
with higher wind velocities that either re-entrain or carry crustal material from other
sources.
Figure 5-13: Agglomerate containing fly ash suspected to be derived from ash
emplacement as Ravensworth Void.
112
This was investigated by examining the wind speed and direction data for the high SO2
events described above. As shown in Table 5-5, the high SO2 events generally occurred
in relatively still conditions unlikely to be conducive to lift off from the ash
emplacement site. Wind direction was also considered but found to be of little
assistance since the ash emplacement site is virtually in line with the power stations
from the monitoring site. However, the wind direction is consistent with the direction
of the power stations (Bayswater 296 degrees and Liddell 312 degrees).
Table 5-5: Wind speed and direction during events selected for analysis (Burkard
sampler tapes).
The estimated maximum contribution of the primary particulate power station emissions
at Ravensworth estimated from the tape over the study period May to December 2002
was 0.42 µg m-3, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.40-1.12 µg m-3. This is a similar
magnitude to estimates using the dilution factors of Table 4-1. Higher power station
relative contributions typically occur at times when particulate matter is generally low
due to meteorological factors: the emissions are least diluted during still conditions and
overnight inversions, whereas dust from mines and resuspension of particles requires
higher wind velocities. High particulate matter events are dominated by other sources,
suspected to be crustal in origin i.e. mining or resuspension of dust. Limited data from
a single event sampled at Blackmans flat indicated broadly similar results and
concentrations, although the fly ash particles observed were smaller and more
numerous. It is therefore concluded that power station primary particulate emissions
make only a small and episodic contribution to atmospheric fine particulate mass at the
Ravensworth monitoring site.
100%
90%
80%
Coll ec tion effic ienc y
70%
60%
50% St 3 St 2 St 1
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
This calibration confirms that the cascade impactor is successfully classifying the
sampled aerosol into a number of size fractions. The cut sizes for the ambient aerosol
will vary from the cut sizes above due to differences in particle density, which affects
the inertia of the particles and their ability to break free of the air stream and strike the
impaction surface. The cut sizes are inversely proportional to the square root of the
density, as shown in Equation 3-1. Table 5-6 illustrates the impact of particle density
on the cut size calculated from Equation 3-1. The calculations assume the air stream is
incompressible which is generally true providing the velocity through the nozzle is less
than 100 m s-1 (Marple and Willeke, 1976). This is true for all stages except Stage 5,
and the cut size for Stage 5 may be slightly larger than estimated (gas compression will
reduce the velocity).
115
Table 5-6: Calculated cut sizes for particles of different densities.
In summary, while cut sizes are difficult to determine with certainty, it is likely that
Stage 1 will have a d50 of around 2.5 µm and that the final stage will have a d50 of
around 0.2-0.3 µm.
Table 5-7: Average SO2 concentrations during high SO2 sampling campaigns.
116
The elemental masses were converted to airborne concentrations in ng m-3 by dividing
by the sampled volume, determined by multiplying the flowrate through the impactor
(measured at 1.07 LPM during laboratory calibrations) by the number of hours indicated
by the run clock on the conditional sampling power supply. Elemental concentrations
were preferred over oxides to avoid biasing the analysis on potentially erroneous
stoichiometry. The full, unchecked data set consisted of a matrix of 96 rows (16 runs,
each with 6 impactor stages) and 23 columns (elements F, Na, Mg, Al, Si, P, S, Cl, K,
Ca, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Br, Se, Sr and Pb). F, Na and Mg were
determined using PIGE, while the other elements were measured with PIXE.
Table 5-8 summarises the key descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for
the high and low SO2 samples on an element by element basis. The total masses are
also included for interest, both as the sum of all elemental masses and as an indicative
mass when converted to oxides (but not allowing for any water of hydration). Note that
these totals are effectively the average mass per stage, and thus an estimate of the
average reconstituted airborne concentration can be made by multiplying by 6. The
indicated concentrations are hence around 6 µg m-3 for the low SO2 cases and 11 µg m-3
for the high SO2 samples – considerably less than the average PM10 measured at the
monitoring site of 25 µg m-3. This is probably due to the elements that were not able to
be measured, particularly C and N; organics and elemental carbon were found to
117
contribute 46% of PM2.5 at Muswellbrook, with soil and salt only accounting for 14% of
PM2.5 mass (MSC, 2003). It is probable that the coarser particles were not collected as
efficiently due to the inlet tube and the fact that sampling was not isokinetic. This is
consistent with the stage masses, which are not dramatically higher for Stage 1 than the
other stages, as might be expected given the cut size of around 2.5 µm.
Table 5-8: Overview of Data Integrity – all stages (“High Integrity” data has an
error of less than 25%, “Lower Confidence” from 25-100%).
Table 5-8 also summarises the errors associated with different elements and provides
some indication of the strength of the data set. The elements present in higher
concentrations have much lower associated errors and there are more data which can be
considered high integrity. Elements present in lower concentrations have much higher
relative errors; this is clearly reflected in the relatively weak data for the elements V, Se,
Sr and Pb, which have no data with errors less than 25% and many samples below
detection limits.
118
Rank outliers were also identified by statistical checks on the data from individual
stages – individual results more than 4 standard deviations from the mean of each stage
were excluded (over the 16 runs). This is a slightly less strenuous criterion than the
three standard deviation maximum deviation used in other studies (Bridgman, 1992;
Cohen, 1997) and was chosen to retain as much of the original data as possible. 3 data
values were identified as outliers, all in the “High Integrity” group.
While the results from the filter analyses were quite different from the remainder of the
data in a multivariate sense, it was not possible to run PCA on the different size
fractions because the number of observations needs to be many more (>50) than the
number of elements analysed to derive stable results (Thurston and Spengler, 1985).
The PCA was conducted on the full data set as well as a range of reduced data sets with
the lower confidence results progressively excluded. The best source extraction was
obtained on the validated data set with the three outlier results and elements V, Se, Sr
and Pb excluded. 5 components or potential sources were identified with eigenvalues
greater than 1 that explained nearly 86% of the variance in the data set, as shown in
Table 5-9. Analysis of the full data set with the three outlier results excluded yielded a
6 component solution that explained 81% of the variance in the data set. The reduction
in variance explained is believed to be due to the extra 4 elements bringing more noise
119
than information to the data set. Further details on several of the alternative analyses
can be found in Appendix G.
Table 5-9 also shows the component factor loadings, which indicate the degree of
correlation of the components with the individual elements. The degree of correlation
which is considered significant depends on the number of independent observations:
95% confidence curves for correlation coefficients indicate that values greater than plus
or minus 0.2 are likely to be significant for 100 observations (Johnson, 1998). Loadings
greater than around 0.3 are shown in bold in the table for clarity (a correlation of 0.3 can
be thought of as indicating true correlations between 0.1 and 0.5).
Table 5-9: Results of Principal Component Analysis with varimax rotation on the
validated IBA cascade impactor results.
Component
1 2 3 4 5
Interpretation Soil CFPS Salt Diesel Indust
Eigenvalue 4.85 3.31 2.06 1.93 1.53
% Variance 30.3 20.7 12.9 12.1 9.6
Cum variance 30.3 60.0 63.8 75.9 85.5
Na .174 .046 .879 .333 -.023
Al .912 -.138 .058 .082 -.120
Si .729 .174 .062 .071 -.346
S -.023 .874 .275 .100 -.104
Cl .090 .716 .590 -.068 -.026
K .902 -.044 .141 -.078 .308
Ca .870 .271 .021 -.004 .058
Ti .934 -.140 .051 -.047 .242
Fe .886 -.059 .079 -.012 .369
Mn .225 .016 .462 .143 .698
Ni -.050 .858 .013 .231 .248
Zn .159 .270 .153 .835 .139
Cr -.028 .821 -.015 .374 .038
Cu .323 .511 -.068 .318 .601
Br -.183 .224 .167 .881 .052
Co .020 .292 .745 .044 .399
Component 1 is identified as soil and is strongly associated with the typical crustal
elements Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti and Fe; these elements were also extracted in a study of data
from Mascot in Sydney (Cohen et al., 2004). The authors also found Co associated
with this profile, but not Cu as indicated here. Note also that this source is associated
with many of the elements expected to be present in primary particulate matter from
power stations; these sources are unlikely to be extracted as separate components.
The above identification of the components was further investigated plotting the factor
scores (a normalised measure of the contribution of each factor) against particle size as
indicated by the impactor stage, as shown in Figure 5-15. Average factor scores for
high and low SO2 conditions are plotted separately to further examine the hypothesis
that Component 2 represents CFPS emissions (each point represents 8 cases). The plots
are consistent with this hypothesis as this component is far stronger in the high SO2
cases and strongly associated with the finest size fractions, less than 0.3 µm or so. The
component identified as diesel emissions is also enriched in this size fraction under both
high and low SO2 regimes, as might be expected.
2.5 2.5
Cpt 1 - Soil Cpt 1 - Soil
Cpt 2 - CFPS Cpt 2 - CFPS
2 Cpt 3 - Salt 2 Cpt 3 - Salt
Fac tor Sc ore (Loading)
Factor Score (Loading)
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
-0.5 -0.5
Finer Coarser Finer Coarser
-1 -1
Filter St 5 St 4 St 3 St 2 St 1 Filter St 5 St 4 St 3 St 2 St 1
122
Enrichment in the finest fraction is consistent with sources where particles are formed
during combustion or at high temperatures, as would be expected for Components 2, 4
and 5. Component 5 also shows enrichment in the coarser sizes under low SO2
conditions, although the reasons for this are unclear. Component 1 – the crustal
signature – is strongly associated with the coarser size fractions i.e. larger than about 1
µm. Perhaps the most surprising result is the strong association of Component 3 – salt –
with the finest sizes; other studies indicate that salt is more strongly associated with the
coarser sizes (Thurston and Spengler, 1985; Pio et al., 1996; Chan et al., 1999b). The
increased loading of this component in the high SO2 samples suggests that some of this
component may also be originating from the power stations, perhaps from dissolved
salts in the water fed to cooling towers or from stack emissions.
The most conservative analysis that excludes all elements with significant numbers of
low confidence data is restricted to Na, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti and Fe – this resulted in
only two factors being extracted with significant lumping together. Component 1
(explaining 52% of variance) remains a soil signature and is characterised by Al, Si, K,
Ca, Ti and Fe as before. Component 2 (explaining 25% of variance) becomes a lumped
sea salt / CFPS signature and is associated with Na, Cl and S.
A slightly less conservative analysis includes the data for Ni, Mn and Zn, the elements
with around 40 high integrity data values; this resulted in the extraction of 3
components. Again, Component 1 is readily identified as soil, explaining 39% of
variance and associated with Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti and Fe. Component 2 (explaining 22% of
variance) is associated with S, Cl, Ni and Zn, and appears to be a CFPS signature.
123
Component 3 explains 16% of variance, is associated with Na, Cl, Mn and Zn, and is
readily identified as salt. The three components account for 76% of the variance in the
data.
The final reduced data set adds in the data for Cr, Co, Cu and Br, the elements which
mainly have “lower confidence” data, but fewer values below the detection limits than
the final group V, Se, Sr and Pb. PCA on this data set resulted in the extraction of five
components, with essentially the same extraction of components as the full data set
(excepting the excluded elements). Component 1 remains associated with Al, Si, K, Ca,
Ti and Fe - it is again identified as soil, explaining 30% of variance. Component 2,
explaining 21% of variance, is identified as CFPS emissions and is associated with S,
Cl, Ni, Cr, Cu and to a lesser extent Zn and Co. Component 3 (13% of variance) is salt,
associated with Na, Cl, Mn and Co. S is also weakly associated with this component, as
with the solution for the full data set. Component 4 (12% of variance) appears to be a
diesel signature, and is associated strongly with Zn and Br, and to a lesser extent Na, Cr
and Cu. Component 5 (10% of variance) is similar to the Indust 1 source, and is most
strongly associated with Mn and Cu, and more weakly with K, Fe and Co, as well as a
negative correlation with Si. Overall variance explained is superior to any of the other
analyses at 86%, indicating that the components explain the variations in the original
data quite well.
Including the lower confidence data for V, Se, Sr and Pb into the data set, but excluding
the three outlier results, results in a decrease in the predictive power of the solution.
Factor analysis of this data set results in a 6 component solution which explains 81% of
the variance. The components are summarised below:
Component 1 (Soil): 24% of variance, elements Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti, V and Fe
Component 2 (CFPS): 17% of variance, elements S, Cl, Cr, Ni, Cu, Zn
Component 3 (Indust): 11% of variance, elements V, Mn, Fe and Cu
Component 4 (Salt): 24% of variance, elements Na, Cl, Mn and Co
Component 5 (Diesel): 10% of variance, elements Cr, Zn, Br and Se
Component 6 (New): 8% of variance, elements Sr and Pb
124
This solution is not favoured as Component 6 is only associated with low confidence
data and the overall variance explained is inferior to the 5 component solution. This is
believed to be due to the extra elements bringing more noise to the data set than
meaningful information.
It is interesting to note that the inclusion of the three outlier results improves the model
fit in terms of variance explained to a level comparable (86%) with the 5 factor solution
using 16 elements. However, it is suspected that this may be due to these outlier results
forcing the solution rather than providing a meaningful improvement in source
extraction. Seven components are extracted, with a similarly strange association of Sr
and Pb on one component. The main difference is a new component associated with Si,
Cr, Co, Ni and Cu – it is possible this component is fly ash, although the overall
solution is more difficult to interpret.
125
Table 5-10: Independent samples t-test comparing means of overall high and low
SO2 data sets (summarised from Appendix H).
Statistically significant enrichments were found in the high SO2 cases compared to the
low SO2 cases for Si and S only when all stages were compared. While some of the
other elements associated with the CFPS component - Cl, Cr and Ni - were also
enriched in the high SO2 cases, there was no evidence that this enrichment was
statistically significant. This is hardly surprising given the low concentrations and noise
in the data set: the standard deviations of the data were considerably higher than the
mean values as shown in Table 5-8. Much larger samples with smaller associated
analysis errors would be required to statistically demonstrate any potential enrichment.
Cu and Zn, the other elements associated with the CFPS signature, were depleted in the
high SO2 cases compared to the low SO2 cases, although once again the mean difference
was not statistically significant.
The analysis was also repeated on a stage by stage basis, given the strong association of
a number of components with particle size. The enrichments of Si, S and Cl are shown
in Table 5-11 (see Appendix H for all results). The only other elements to show
statistically significant mean differences were small depletions found for Fe and Cu in
Stage 5, although this may be due to random variation (bearing in mind that on average
one would expect one in 20 observations to show a “significant” difference at a 95%
confidence interval). Si was enriched in almost every stage, although these differences
were not statistically significant. In contrast, S and Cl showed significant enrichment in
the finer fractions; these differences were found to be statistically significant for S in
both Stage 5 and the filter, and for the filter only in the case of Cl. Stage 1 was found to
be depleted in Cl during high SO2 sampling, suggesting a possible reduction in coarse
salt. This data indicates that the power station emissions are causing an enrichment of
both Cl and S in the finest fractions, particularly in the minus 0.3 µm fraction.
126
Table 5-11: Summary of independent samples t-tests comparing means of high and
low SO2 data sets for individual stages. Significance is likelihood of observed
enrichment being due to random error with means equal.
-3
Enrichment ng m (significance)
Stage Si S Cl
1 95 (0.784) -5.9 (0.297) -58 (0.032)
2 521 (0.302) 1.8 (0.810) -9.8 (0.640)
3 340 (0.267) 0.4 (0.957) -10.5 (0.515)
4 207 (0.342) 12 (0.742) -0.6 (0.748)
5* -24 (0.836) 75 (0.044) -1.2 (0.316)
F 320 (0.103) 529 (0.035) 300 (0.015)
*Fe depleted -2.7 (0.025), Cu depleted -0.06 (0.047) in Stage 5
Assuming that the indicated sulphur enrichment is present in the form of sulphate, the
possible contribution of the CFPS emissions (assuming all enrichment is from this
source) is as follows:
• For S in Stage 5: enrichment of 150 ng m-3 (95%CI 6-294 ng m-3)
• For S in Filter: enrichment of 1058 ng m-3 (95%CI 92-2024 ng m-3)
• For Cl in Filter: enrichment of 300 ng m-3 (95%CI 76 - 523 ng m-3)
Note that these estimates ignore the possible contribution of the salt component, which
is also enriched in the filter samples and is associated with Cl and to a lesser extent S.
The wide confidence intervals on the estimated enrichments reflect the noise in the
underlying data. Note also that these effects are the direct contribution of the plume; the
emissions will also affect sulphate background levels on a regional level depending on
the circulation of air through the wider region.
127
include the absence or weak correlation of expected elements in some of the
components and the negative association of other elements with other components.
The full derivation of the component mass contributions is based on the method of
Thurston and Spengler (1985) and further details of the current analysis can be found in
Appendix I. Essentially, the method involves using the various matrices associated with
the rotated solution to derive absolute principal component scores (which can be
thought of as normalised mass contributions) for each component in each observation;
these scores are regressed on the overall mass (in this case the sum of the masses of the
20 elements retained) to derive an expected mass for each component. The five
components extracted explain the variations in overall mass concentrations quite well,
as shown in Figure 5-16, with only one observation an obvious outlier. It is interesting
to note that the solution to the regression results in negative “mass” contributions of
some components to a number of observations – this is believed to be due to noise in the
data, similar to the negative correlations for some elements in the component matrix
shown in Table 5-9.
5,000
4,500
4,000
-3
Predic ted Mas s , ng m
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000
-3
Ac tual Mas s , ng m
Figure 5-16: Predictive power of the six components derived from rotated PCA
solution to explain total measured mass concentrations.
The next step is to regress the expected mass values for individual components against
the elemental concentrations (one element at a time) to derive chemical profiles for the
components. Table 5-12 summarises the average contribution of each component
across the full dataset as well as the chemical profiles for each component.
128
Table 5-12: Chemical profiles for components derived using PCA.
Component
1 2 3 4 5
Interpretation Soil CFPS Salt Diesel Indust
Avg Mass (ng) 453.4 130.1 157.7 51.5 -3.0
% Mass 56.6% 16.2% 19.7% 6.4% -0.4%
Cum % Mass 56.6% 72.9% 92.6% 99.0% 98.6%
Na 5.7% 2.3% 48.0% 46.3% 2.4%
Al 9.9% -2.3% 1.1% 3.8% 4.3%
Si 66.8% 23.8% 9.5% 27.6% 104.0%
S -0.9% 49.5% 17.4% 16.1% 12.9%
Cl 1.8% 21.1% 19.5% -5.7% 1.7%
K 3.0% -0.2% 0.8% -1.1% -3.4%
Ca 2.7% 1.3% 0.1% -0.1% -0.6%
Ti 1.2% -0.3% 0.1% -0.3% -1.0%
Cr 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 1.0% -0.1%
Mn 0.3% 0.0% 1.0% 0.8% -3.0%
Fe 9.7% -1.0% 1.4% -0.6% -13.2%
Co 0.0% 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% -0.5%
Ni -0.1% 3.6% 0.1% 2.8% -2.3%
Cu 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% -0.5%
Zn 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 2.4% -0.3%
Br -0.3% 0.6% 0.5% 6.4% -0.3%
Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from this data:
• The 5 components together explain 98.6% of the mass, compared to 85.5% of
the variance. This is partially due to the higher noise in elements present in low
concentrations, and the fact that all elements are equally weighted through
normalisation.
• While the sums of the chemical profiles are all close to 100%, the profile for
Component 5 includes values which are difficult to interpret - negative values
and values greater than 100% which are possible in a mathematical solution to a
regression problem, but not in physical reality. However, this component
explains very little of the mass and these anomalies are not considered
detrimental to the integrity of the major sources. Note that the source profiles
for the 6 component solution (i.e. including V, Se, Sr and Pb) are considerably
worse in this respect, with the extra noise resulting in more anomalous values
(see Appendix G for details).
• The chemical profiles for soil, salt and CFPS emissions look reasonable in
terms of their elemental composition, although the Ni concentration appears
quite high for the CFPS component (but is consistent in both 5 and 6
component solutions).
129
• The mass attributed to diesel emissions (6%) is highly questionable as the
principal mass component of diesel (i.e. carbon) was not in the elemental suite.
These data allow the average contribution of the CFPS component source to the high
SO2 cases to be determined (at a mean SO2 of 46 ppb). The major contribution is in the
minus 0.3 µm fraction, with an average elemental mass attributed to this component of
1138 ng m-3 This equates to around 2.0 µg m-3 when converted to oxides and accounts
for about 56% of the total mass of this size fraction. The major contributors to the
CFPS mass are 1.1 µg m-3 of sulphur (assumed present as sulphate), 0.6 µg m-3 of Si
(assumed present as SiO2) and 0.2 µg m-3 of Cl assumed present as chloride. These
values are comparable to the mean differences from the t-tests, although the Cl
contribution from CFPS is less from PCA due to some Cl being derived from the salt
component. Uncertainties in the PCA estimates cannot be readily estimated, although
large variations were noted in the mass assigned to this component, despite
comparatively minor variations in the average SO2.
Principal component analysis with varimax orthogonal rotation was conducted on the
resulting data set, after the removal of 3 outliers and the exclusion of 4 further elements
with high uncertainties. Five components were extracted, with four of these in good
agreement with other studies and consistent with what is known about local sources,
despite low concentrations and significant errors in many of the elements. The
components explained 86% of the variance in the original dataset, indicating both that
130
much of the data in the original dataset was valid and that the components adequately
represented the aerosol chemistry, even though the individual samples represented
different size fractions. The elemental associations and assumed interpretation of these
components is as follows:
Comparison of the high and low SO2 datasets also suggested enrichment of Si, although
not to a statistically significant extent. It is likely that any alumino silicate fly ash
present would be assigned to the soil component as the chemistry is similar. The
possible enrichment of transition metals Cr, Ni, Cu and Zn in the high SO2 samples due
131
to the CFPS source was not found to be statistically significant with considerable noise
evident in the data.
Table 5-13: Summary of NAS campaigns and quality of sample loading in terms of
suitability for TEM assessment.
This section will discuss in detail the results of TEM investigations into two of the
Ravensworth samples, one collected during low SO2 concentrations (N3) and the other
collected during high SO2 concentrations (R5). The two diesel exhaust samples T1 and
T3 will also be discussed in reasonable detail as it was found that they were highly
significant in understanding the samples collected at Ravensworth.
(a) T1 – idle – scale bar is 100 nm (b) T1 – idle – scale bar is 100 nm
(c) T3 – start-up – scale bar is 500 nm (d) T3 – start-up – scale bar is 200 nm
Figure 5-17: Images from diesel exhaust samples T1 and T3.
Emissions from diesel vehicles are known to consist almost entirely of unburnt carbon,
with some enrichment relative to crustal sources of elements such as Zn, Mo, Ni, Cu,
Ag, Cd, Sb, Se and Br (Weckwerth, 2001). Morphological studies have shown the
emissions be chain like agglomerates of primary particles which range from 5-50 nm
and are commonly around 20-25 nm (Wentzel et al., 2003; Braun et al., 2004). The
primary particles in both the idle and start-up images above are in the range 20-45 nm;
133
the agglomerates appeared larger in the start-up sample than in the idle sample. This is
consistent with other findings in the literature, although great interest is also noted in the
fractal dimensions of the agglomerates (Kim et al., 2001; Virtanen et al., 2004). This
was not explored further as the principal aim of this characterisation was to be able
recognise diesel soot in the ambient samples if present. However, it would appear that
the NAS is well suited for studies of diesel particulates, as collection on the TEM
substrate would prevent further agglomeration or modification.
EDX spectra were also collected for several of the soot particles for comparison with
the atmospheric samples (the spot size was 25 nm). Three spectra are shown in Figure
5-18 – one of a blank section of the sample (i.e. the formvar film) and two where soot
particles were observed. All three spectra show what are believed to be system peaks
for the elements Cu, Fe and Co emanating from the copper grid – the varying intensity
of these peaks is believed to be related to the proximity of the analysis point to the edge
of the grid. Also apparent are carbon peaks of varying intensity – the small peak in the
blank spectrum is believed to be due to the carbon in the formvar film. The particles
identified as soot both show strong carbon peaks.
.
It is interesting to note that a small peak is also found for Si, which is unlikely to be due
to other elements (X-Ray emission energies for Si are 1.739 keV and 1.829 keV; see
Appendix J for a table of energies for most elements). There is also evidence of a peak
for O in one of the spectra, and this peak could be masked by the high carbon peak in
the other. The origin of the Si peak is not clear, but it is suspected to be genuine as its
presence in diesel soot has been previously noted, together with a peak for O as found
here (Wentzel et al., 2003). These authors were also unable to identify the origin of the
Si, but ruled out measurement error or contamination (Wentzel et al., 2003).
134
(a) Blank
(b) Soot
(c) Soot
Figure 5-18: EDX spectra from UNSW TEM of blank film and soot particles from
sample T1 – horizontal axis is the energy of the detected X-rays, vertical axis is
total counts.
135
5.3.2 Character of Particles Collected Under Low SO2 Conditions
A selection of the images acquired during the TEM inspection of the N3 sample is
shown in Figure 5-19. The sample was dominated by soot particles, which were readily
identified from the diesel exhaust characterisation described above. EDX spectra were
acquired for a number of these particles as an additional check, yielding similar results
to those shown in Figure 5-18. It was noted that the soot particles found in the ambient
aerosol appeared to be more compact than in the emissions samples, although this was
not systematically investigated. This is suspected to be due to folding in of some of the
longer chains, which were noted to be quite flexible and moved about under the electron
beam if not attached to the surface of the TEM grid.
(a) Diesel soot (scale bar is 100 nm) (b) Salt residue, probably sulphate (scale is 50 nm)
(c) Dendritic particle, plus soot (scale bar is 100 (d) Large solid, stable particle, probably crustal
nm) (scale bar is 200 nm)
Figure 5-19: Sample images from TEM analysis of low SO2 sample N3.
136
Two other principal types of particles were observed in this sample:
• volatile species which decomposed under the electron beam and sometimes left
a residue, as shown in Figure 5-19 (b);
• stable particles of variable morphology and composition suspected to be derived
from crustal material, as shown in Figure 5-19 (c) and (d).
It was not possible to individually identify particles off-line via image analysis due to a
significantly lower difference in brightness between objects and the background than
with the SEM images. As a result, the images collected were restricted to adequately
describing the range of objects observed rather than attempting to image large numbers
of particles. An indication of the number distribution of the various particle types was
provided by manually counting particles in 2 fields of view for 10 grid areas randomly
chosen from the overall sample. The magnification selected was 40,000 times, which
corresponded to a 250 nm object appearing as 10 mm on the display. This enabled
identification of particles down to around 20-30 nm. Three broad categories of objects
were identified in the low SO2 sample, as shown in Table 5-14; uncertainties have been
estimated using the standard deviation of the ten frame counts and reflect counting
statistics rather than an attempt to consider the effect of volatilisation of particles. Most
of the objects were identified as soot, with small amounts of both residues from unstable
aerosols and solid particles likely to be very fine crustal particles.
Table 5-14: Approximate distribution of particle types in low SO2 sample (N3).
The fourth column in Table 5-14 presents a simple sensitivity analysis which considers
what happens when only one out of three unstable particles leaves a visible residue. In
either case, it is clear that the ultrafine aerosol in this case is strongly dominated by soot
particles, with very little crustal some unstable material. The unstable material is
difficult to identify conclusively but is probably secondary particulate matter consisting
137
of ammonium sulphate. This has been widely observed in other studies both overseas
and in Australia (Mamane and Dzubay, 1986; Querol et al., 1999; MSC, 2003).
Sulphates have been observed in a number of TEM studies, although they can be rapidly
volatilised by the electron beam within a matter of seconds (Posfai et al., 1994). Acidic
particles, where the sulphuric acid has not as yet been neutralised, are more hygroscopic
and tend to spread further on the TEM grid (Mamane and Dzubay, 1986; Buseck and
Posfai, 1999). Residues from evaporated particles have been observed to range from
empty halos to crystalline residues (Posfai et al., 1994; Buseck and Posfai, 1999;
Wentzel et al., 2003).
(a) Diesel soot showing halo of suspected (b) Crystalline residue from evaporated acidic
ammonium sulphate particle (scale bar is 100 nm) sulphate particle (scale bar is 50 nm)
138
(c) Amorphous, heterogeneous residue from (d) Capsule shaped residues from unidentified
scavenger droplet (scale bar is 200 nm) sublimated particles (scale bar is 200 nm)
Figure 5-20: Sample images from TEM analysis of high SO2 sample R5.
The halo observed touching the soot particle in Figure 5-20 (a) is very similar to an
image in the literature of a mixed particle consisting of a sublimated ammonium
sulphate particle and a soot agglomerate (Wentzel et al., 2003), while Figure 5-20 (b) is
similar to images of sublimated ammonium sulphate particles with un-neutralised
sulphuric acid (Buseck and Posfai, 1999). Figure 5-20 (c) appears to be the residue left
by a scavenger water droplet, and contains a range of regions suspected to be of
different species. The grainy appearance of some of the residue is due to the presence
of small crystals as in Figure 5-20 (b). Figure 5-20 (d) shows a comparatively common
capsule shaped residue, with an empty centre. These particles were observed to
decompose rapidly under the electron beam, but it is unclear why the residues are
capsule shaped rather than spherical as reported in the literature for droplets. One
possibility is that the original particles were elongated crystals, producing a capsule
shaped “melt” during sublimation. It is also possible that these objects could have been
biological, although it seems unlikely that they would be as unstable as observed.
The Cu and Fe/Co peaks are almost certainly system peaks from the grid itself as
before. The combined Cu/Na peak at around 1 keV is believed to be mainly due to the
presence of Na; blank checks (confirmed by the soot spectra in Figure 5-18) indicated
that the Cu peaks at around 0.94 keV are typically around 10% of the height of the peak
at 8.0 keV. It is also possible that some samples showed genuine Fe peaks, although
these were also observed in some of the blank spectra. Probable, non-system peaks are
typically O, Na, Si, S and K, with significant variation between residues in peak height.
This combination of elements was reasonably consistent between the residues, and is
consistent with combustion signature of coal (Cohen, 1998). K is often also associated
with biomass burning, as well as unburnt carbon (Chan et al., 1999b; Song et al., 2001)
140
Figure 5-21: EDX spectra from UNSW TEM of residues from unstable particles –
horizontal axis is the energy of the detected X-rays, vertical axis is total counts.
Manual particle counting was also used to provide an indication of the distribution of
the various particle types for this sample. Extra categories were added to the “unstable”
particle class, with these being classified as either capsule shaped, round or amorphous.
Table 5-15 summarises the results from counting of 10 different grid fields, taken over
up to 6 fields of view (counting continued until around 50 soot particles were identified
in each grid field). The data confirms that soot is the dominant aerosol component
observed, accounting for around two thirds of all counted objects. Nearly all the other
objects were residues from unstable secondary particles, with around 21% of these as
either a capsule shaped or approximately circular halo. 8% of the residues were
amorphous or had crystals that were too small to be seen at the magnification used for
the counting exercise (small crystals were observed when examined at higher
magnifications). Only 2% of the observed particles were thought to be derived from
crustal material.
141
Table 5-15: Approximate distribution of particles in high SO2 sample (R5).
The fourth column in Table 5-15 is a sensitivity analysis (as in Table 5-14) to see how
the distribution changes if only a third of the secondary particles left a residue. If this
were the case, soot would account for 43% of all particles, with secondary particles
more numerous at 55% on a number basis. Note that it is extremely difficult to estimate
the relative mass concentrations of the various particles due to the variable and complex
size and morphology of the soot particles and the short life of unstable species in the
electron beam. An additional complication is the varying degrees of water association
that can be expected with different sulphate species in particular depending on their
degree of neutralisation (Posfai et al., 1998; Buseck and Posfai, 1999).
It is interesting to note that primary particulates from power station emissions were not
identified in the sample. This may be because primary particles were present in only
low concentrations or alternatively because they were difficult to identify. The
concentration of ultrafine primary particles can be estimated from the expected total
mass of primary particles under sampling conditions by making an assumption about
the relative contribution of ultrafine particles. The average SO2 concentrations during
the high SO2 sampling for the cascade impactor sampling (46 ppb) must be used as no
SO2 data is available for the high SO2 sample N5. At this SO2 concentration, the total
expected contribution of primary particulate matter is 1.4 µg m-3 (using dilution factors
from Table 4-1). If around 2% of this material is assumed to less than 0.4 µm (see
Figure 2-6), this would indicate a concentration of around 0.028 µg m-3. This should be
compared with the estimated sulphate component from the factor analysis of the cascade
impactor data of 1 µg m-3. Similarly, the Muswellbrook PM2.5 data can be used for a
first estimate of the amount of soot likely to be present – the data indicates around 14%
of the total loading of 7 µg m-3 is soot, i.e. also approximately around 1 µg m-3. On this
basis, one might expect 1 or 2% of the particle mass to be power station primary
142
particulate matter. The morphology of such particles is not well known, although it is
known that they are formed by evaporation, condensation and coagulation, much in the
same way as soot. It is possible that some of the particles identified as soot purely on
the basis of morphology (given that the counting statistics were derived on the basis of
morphology alone) were in fact power station primary particulates. Further sampling
and more systematic analysis would be required to conclusively answer this question.
TEM is the most suitable method for analysing these samples due to the superior
resolution over SEM. Particles from various sources can be readily recognised,
although secondary particulates such as ammonium sulphate are unstable under the
electron beam. Analysis of a limited number of samples from Ravensworth indicates
that the ultrafine component of ambient aerosol is composed of soot, minor amounts of
crustal material and variable amounts of secondary particles. Soot was found to
dominate in the low SO2 samples, with very minor contributions from secondary
particles and some fine crustal material. The high SO2 sample studied also contained
significant numbers of soot particles, but considerable quantities of secondary particles
were noted as well. The behaviour of this material under the beam and the nature of the
residues were similar to that described in the literature for ammonium sulphate and
other sulphate species. Significant carbon peaks were noted in the EDX spectra
obtained from these residues compared to the blank film, suggesting the presence of
organic aerosols, perhaps formed through the catalytic oxidation of VOCs in the
presence of acidic seed species as suggested in the literature. However, the amount of
data available is very limited and this can only be a tentative hypothesis without further
investigation.
143
It is interesting to note that primary particulate emissions from power stations were not
observed in the high SO2 samples. While calculations suggested that such particles
should be present in low concentrations, perhaps accounting for 1-2% of the mass, no
such particles were identified. However, it should be noted that the identification of
particles was conducted on the basis of morphology alone, and it is quite possible that
sub micron particulates from power stations would have been mis-identified as soot in
the absence of chemical analysis data.
144
6 INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT OF RESULTS
This chapter will evaluate and integrate the data from the experimental programs in
terms of the study aims and use the results from air pollution modelling to estimate
likely impacts on the nearby townships of Singleton and Muswellbrook. The results
presented in the previous chapter indicate that the contribution of power station
emissions can be divided into two components: a “coarse” fraction of primary
particulate matter or fly ash larger than 1 µm, and a fine component concentrated in the
size fraction less than 0.3 µm. The mass of this fine component is dominated by sulphur
assumed present as sulphate, and this chapter will include a discussion of the formation
of this material.
TAPM modelling predicts that the practical maximum contribution (the 99.9th percentile
value – i.e. only 0.1% of values are higher) of primary particulate emissions to TSP at
the Ravensworth site is 4.6 µg m-3. These estimates assume equivalent dispersion of
gases and particulates and are based on the ratio of TSP and SO2 emissions at the power
station stack; they are therefore likely to be an overestimate as they ignore the impact of
gravitational settling. The maximum contribution to PM10 is expected to be about 50%
of this value i.e. 2.3 µg m-3. The nearby urban areas of Singleton and Muswellbrook are
less impacted by the power station emissions, with estimated maximum contributions to
PM10 of around 1.6 µg m-3 and 1.2 µg m-3 respectively.
The concentration of primary particulate emissions is both minor and highly episodic –
most of the time the contribution of power station emissions is negligible. It should be
145
noted that these estimates also assume that the source emission rates are constant in
time and the same for all point sources; in reality, emissions are likely to show some
variation which will also affect the concentrations. The variations may increase or
decrease concentrations experienced in individual episodes, but are unlikely to greatly
impact the overall distribution of concentrations.
The Nanometer Aerosol Sampler (NAS) results on particles less than 0.4 µm are
consistent with these observations, with considerable quantities of unstable particles
assumed to be sulphate species observed during the TEM examination of samples
collected at elevated SO2 concentrations. It was found to be difficult to quantify the
mass contribution of these particulates due to their instability during analysis; the
sublimated particles left varying degrees of residues suspected to be related to the
degree of sulphate neutralisation and hence the extent of associated water. The
chemistry of the residues was consistent with literature profiles for coal combustion,
and their appearance was consistent with literature studies of sulphate species using
TEM. Primary particulate emissions were not identified in the high SO2 sample;
similarly, no particles containing chlorine were observed to explain the measured
enrichment in the cascade impactor samples in particles of similar size. However, there
were indications that the residues may have contained carbon from acid seed catalysed
formation of secondary aerosols.
While the sampling program was not targeted towards this material, results from both
the cascade impactor and Nanometer Aerosol Sampler (NAS) therefore indicate the
presence of significant quantities of sulphate species. Such species are commonly
associated with secondary particulate matter, formed by gas to particle conversion in the
atmosphere. Common species in both urban and non-urban environments are sulphuric
acid, ammonium bisulphate, ammonium sulphate and ammonium nitrate (Watson and
Chow, 1994). Coal fired power stations are one of the largest sources of the precursor
147
gases for these species, SO2 and NOx. Other sources include metal smelting and motor
vehicle emissions (Ayers and Granek, 1997), while some sulphur is also derived from
sea salt (Keywood et al., 2000). Ammonium salts are formed from progressive
neutralisation of acid aerosols by atmospheric ammonia, derived largely from livestock
and fertiliser (ApSimon et al., 1987). Possible explanations for the sulphate and other
species observed are discussed below.
The power stations emit considerable quantities of both sulphuric acid and hydrochloric
acid, as shown in Table 2-9. The reported emissions of sulphuric acid are perhaps more
correctly termed emissions of SO3, which are rapidly transformed in the atmosphere to
droplets of H2SO4 (Hewitt, 2001); however they will be referred to here as sulphuric
acid emissions for simplicity. These reported emissions can be used to estimate
expected concentrations during the sampling period to infer the amount of SO2
oxidation and HCl capture required to explain the observed concentrations. The
equivalent concentrations of H2SO4 and HCl at an SO2 concentration of 46 ppb (the
average SO2 concentration measured at the sampling location during the high SO2
sampling periods) are calculated as follows:
emissons H 2 SO4
Mass H 2 SO4 = x Conc SO2 x 2.6 µg SO2 per ppb
emissions SO2
1,300,000kg
= x 46 x 2.6 = 1.3µgm −3
119,000,000kg
Similarly, the approximate concentration of HCl at 46 ppb SO2 can be calculated as 3.0
µg m-3. Comparing these with the effects attributed to the power station emissions (1.1
148
µg m-3 sulphate and 0.2 µg m-3 chloride) suggests that this material could be largely if
not entirely derived from primary acid emissions.
It is also possible that some of the sulphate is produced through oxidation of SO2,
although daily oxidation rates are expected to be less than 1% per hour (Ayers and
Granek, 1997; Hewitt, 2001), and possibly considerably less since most events are due
to overnight accumulation of emissions. Assuming an average winter drainage flow
wind speed of 3 m s-1 (Bridgman and Cameron, 2000), the travel time of the plume to
the monitoring site would be approximately 3.7 hours. An upper estimate of the amount
of sulphuric acid that could be formed by this pathway is as follows:
MolecularWt H 2 SO4
Mass H 2 SO4 = x Conc SO2 x 2.6 µg SO2 per ppb x 3.7%
MolecularWt SO2
98.07754
= x 46 x 2.6 x 0.037 = 6.8µg m −3
64.0628
Conversely, the oxidation rate required to explain (all of) the observed sulphate is
approximately 0.15% per hour, although it is not possible to differentiate between
sulphate formed from sulphuric acid in the emissions and sulphate formed through the
oxidation of SO2. However, it is clear that the amount of sulphate observed is
consistent with power station emissions, and probably dominated by primary sulphuric
acid emissions with possibly some additional sulphate formed in the atmosphere. Both
sulphuric acid droplets and particulate matter formed from the reaction with
atmospheric ammonia are likely to be retained by the back up filter. In contrast, most
HCl would be expected to remain in gaseous form with limited conversion to droplet or
solid form (the 0.2 µg m-3 observed suggests a collection of about 7% of the emitted
HCl). It is therefore debatable whether this material is properly termed secondary
particulate matter, as it is likely to consist mainly of the primary emissions as opposed
to the products of atmospheric transformations. This mass is reported separately to the
contribution of primary particulate (fly ash) emissions.
149
of this contribution is attributed to sulphate and chloride species, which are believed to
be derived from sulphuric and hydrochloric acid emissions from the power stations.
The other major component in terms of mass is Si assumed present as SiO2, which is
more difficult to interpret. While some Si vaporisation is expected under combustion
conditions, this is unlikely to account for the 0.6 µg m-3 indicated by the factor analysis,
as the total contribution of primary emissions to PM10 emissions is expected to be of the
order of 0.7 µg m-3 as described above. Similarly, the reason for the observed
enrichment of Si in most size fractions in the high SO2 samples from the cascade
impactor is unclear, and larger than the expected effect due to power station fly ash
emissions.
The CFPS component was also associated with several transition metals, particularly
Ni, Cr and Cu. These elements are expected to be enriched in the emissions due to their
relatively high volatility, and have been noted in other studies (Helstroom et al., 2002).
However, larger samples and reduced analytical errors are required to confirm whether
these associations are significant. It is noted, however, that Cr and Ni in particular were
strongly associated with this component, with the estimated source profile containing
0.8% Cr and 3.6% Ni. Other elements expected to be associated with this source
include several “trace” and “matrix” elements, and some were weakly associated with
the component. Additional trace elements that could be expected from other studies
include Zn, Cd, As, V, Pb and Mn (Helstroom et al., 2002); of these Cd and As were
not detected in significant quantities to be included in the elemental suite, while V and
Pb were present in such low concentrations that uncertainties were considerable and
they were eliminated from the final data set for factor analysis. Zn and Co were weakly
associated with the CFPS component, while Mn was not. The general absence (i.e.
weak to no association) of the matrix elements such as Al, Si, Ca, K, Fe and Ti with this
component is thought to be due to the inability of the analysis to differentiate between
soil and primary particulate matter derived from the inorganic constituents in the coal.
Contribution to Mass:
• TAPM modelling assuming equivalent dispersion of gases and particles from the
power station stacks indicated a practical maximum (99.9 percentile)
concentration to PM10 of 2.3 µg m-3 for primary particulates (fly ash >1 µm) at
an SO2 concentration of 150 ppb
• Spore sampler determinations indicated that the highest observed mass
contribution of particles larger than 1 µm was 0.4 µg m-3 with a 95% confidence
interval of 0.40-1.12 µg m-3 for SO2 concentrations from 68 to 220 ppb
• Cascade impactor analyses indicated that species derived from the primary
sulphuric and hydrochloric acid emissions made a significant contribution to the
minus 0.3 µm size fraction. The average mass attributed to power station
emissions at a SO2 concentration of 46 ppb was 2.0 µg m-3; the contribution of
primary particulate matter to PM10 at 46 ppb is estimated from dilution
calculations at 0.7 µg m-3
151
Contribution to Aerosol Chemistry:
• Main impact of power station emissions is in the minus 0.3 µm size fraction,
consisting of an average (oxide) mass of 1.1 µg m-3 sulphur as sulphate, 0.3 µg
m-3 chloride and 0.6 µg m-3 Si as SiO2.
• Possible enrichment of transition metals, particularly Cr, Ni and Cu.
The results of this study are consistent with results from international studies, both in
terms of the magnitude of primary coal fired power station particulate contributions and
the significance of the sulphate component in the finer size fractions of the ambient
aerosol. The mass contributions are, however, significantly lower than the estimates
from dilution calculations made when Liddell was equipped with less efficient ESPs for
emission controls (Jakeman and Simpson, 1987). The indications of incomplete
sulphate neutralisation are also consistent with other studies.
152
7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter reviews the basis, methodology and findings of the study and makes
recommendations for future research.
153
• Few studies have characterised fabric filter emissions, but most of the mass (75-
98%) of emissions is expected to be larger than 1 µm
Three key areas were identified as goals for the experimental program. They were to
develop and implement methodologies for assessing the contribution of power station
primary particulate emissions in terms of their:
o contribution to PM mass;
o contribution to aerosol chemistry; and
o contribution to ultrafine particulates
154
The historical data also showed the episodic nature of events, with highly variable
impacts depending on the prevailing weather conditions. Events were most common
between 8am and 12 noon, due to trapping of pollutants above a stable layer overnight,
which was mixed to ground under the influence of solar heating. The frequency and
duration of events was highly variable; thus the contribution of emissions to the ambient
aerosol was also expected to be intermittent and variable.
While the three methodologies are independent, there is a degree of overlap in terms of
the sizes collected.
155
7.3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The key findings from the various experimental campaigns are summarised below. The
results from the different aspects of the experimental program are complementary and
consistent where overlap does occur.
157
impacts were predicted at the nearby urban areas of Muswellbrook (maximum 1.2 µg m-
3
) and Singleton (maximum 1.6 µg m-3). Analysis of the samples from the Burkard
spore sampler indicated comparable if slightly lower maximum concentrations, with the
highest determination for plus 1 µm particles around 0.4 µg m-3 at an SO2 concentration
of 220 ppb. Uncertainties were significant due to the large impact of 4-5 µm particles
on the mass concentrations, yielding a 95% confidence interval from 0.40-1.12 µg m-3.
Annual average PM10 measurements at Ravensworth are 25 µg m-3, dominated by non-
power station sources such as wind blown soil and emissions from traffic.
Source apportionment of the aerosol based on the size fractionated chemistry data from
the cascade impactor samples indicated that the coal fired power stations (CFPS)
emissions were making a significant contribution to the minus 0.3 µm size fraction.
This material is believed to be largely formed from the emissions of sulphuric and
hydrochloric acid from the power stations. The estimated contribution of CFPS
emissions to this size fraction (on an oxide basis) for the high SO2 samples was 2.0 µg
m-3 at an average SO2 of 46 ppb. This is around 2.8 times the expected contribution of
primary particulates of 0.7 µg m-3 based on TAPM modelling. However, it should be
noted that this material is also subject to the same episodic nature as the primary
particulate contribution as it is the direct impact of the plume. Emissions may also
contribute to background sulphate concentrations due to regional scale impacts.
The observed silicon was not readily explained, but may be due in part to fume
emissions from the vaporisation and condensation of silica under combustion
158
conditions. Low concentrations of chromium, nickel, copper and zinc were also found
to be associated with the fine mass originating from power station emissions, although
this was not statistically significant due to the low sample masses obtained and the
comparatively large analysis errors on these elements.
While emissions are expected to have only a minor and intermittent contribution to the
ambient aerosol even close to source, some uncertainty remains in the contribution of
power station emissions to the minus 0.3 µm size fraction. Additional characterisation
work is recommended in terms of the composition and nature of this fine particulate
matter (minus 0.3 µm) attributed to power station emissions as follows:
159
• Characterisation of sulphate species and rate of conversion to sulphuric acid,
ammonium sulphate and other sulphate species;
• Investigation of potential acid seed catalysed secondary organic aerosol
formation;
• Clarification of the occurrence and nature of silica;
• Investigation of the potential association of this fine particulate with transition
metals, notably chromium and nickel.
160
REFERENCES
Alliksaar, T. and Punning, J. (1998), The spatial distribution of characterised fly-ash
particles and trace metals in lake sediments and catchment mosses: Estonia,
Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 106, 219-239.
Andrade, F., Orsini, C. and Maenhaut, W. (1994), Relation between aerosol sources and
meteorological parameters for inhalable atmospheric particles in Sao Paulo City,
Brazil, Atmospheric Environment, 28, 2307-15.
ApSimon, H. M., Kruse, M. and Bell, J. N. B. (1987), Ammonia emissions and their
role in acid deposition, Atmospheric Environment (1967-1989), 21, 1939-46.
Artaxo, P., Oyola, P. and Martinez, R. (1999), Aerosol composition and source
apportionment in Santiago de Chile, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics
Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 150, 409-
416.
Ayers, G. P., Carras, J. N., Gillett, R. W., Granek, H., Hibberd, M. F., Lilley, W. E.,
Manins, P. C., Merry, R., Mullins, P. J., Munksgaard, N., Smith, C., Szemes, F.,
Parry, D. and Williams, D. (1999a), MIM emissions and the environment final
report to Mount Isa Mines Limited, 5/2/03, CSIRO Atmospheric Research,
CSIRO Energy Technology, CSIRO Land and Water, Northern Territory
University,
http://www.env.qld.gov.au/environment/environment/air/Execsummary.pdf
Ayers, G. P. and Granek, H. (1997), Atmospheric sulfur and its relevance to acid
deposition over Australia, Clean Air (Aust), 31, 38-46.
Ayers, G. P., Keywood, M. D. and Gras, J. L. (1999b), TEOM vs. manual gravimetric
methods for determination of PM2.5 aerosol mass concentrations, Atmospheric
Environment, 33, 3717-3721.
Ayers, G. P., Keywood, M. D., Gras, J. L., Cohen, D., Garton , D. and Bailey, G. M.
(1999c), Chemical and physical properties of Australian fine particles: a pilot
study, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and Australian Nuclear
Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), pp. 99.
Bargagli, R., Cateni, D., Nelli, L., Olmastroni, S. and Zagarese, B. (1997),
Environmental impact of trace element emissions from geothermal power plants,
Archives of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, 33, 172-181.
Barr, E. B., Newton, G. J. and Yeh, H. C. (1982), Nonideal collection characteristics of
a cascade impactor with various collection substrates, Environmental Science
and Technology, 16, 633-5.
Bates, T. S., Lamb, B. K., Guenther, A., Dignon, J. and Stober, R. E. (1992), Sulfur
emissions to the atmosphere from natural sources, Journal of Atmospheric
Chemistry, 14, 325-337.
Battarbee, J. L., Rose, N. L. and Long, X. Z. (1997), A continuous, high resolution
record of urban airborne particulates suitable for retrospective microscopical
analysis, Atmospheric Environment, 31, 171-181.
Benitez, J. (1993), Process engineering and design for air pollution control, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Benson, S. A., McCollor, D. P., Eylands, K. E., Laumb, J. D. and Jensen, R. R. (2001),
Characterization of particulate matter collected with a Burkard sampler,
Preprints of Symposia - American Chemical Society, Division of Fuel
Chemistry, 46, 296-301.
161
Bettinelli, M., Spezia, S., Baroni, U. and Bizzarri, G. (1998), Determination of trace
elements in power plant emissions by inductively coupled plasma mass
spectrometry, comparison with other spectrometric techniques, Microchemical
Journal, 59, 203-218.
Biswas, J., Hogrefe, C., Rao, S. T., Hao, W. and Sistla, G. (2001), Evaluating the
performance of regional-scale photochemical modeling systems. Part III-
Precursor predictions, Atmospheric Environment, 35, 6129-6149.
Bohm, P., Wolterbeek, H., Verburg, T. and Musilek, L. (1998), The use of tree bark for
environmental pollution monitoring in the Czech Republic, Environmental
Pollution, 102, 243-250.
Braun, A., Huggins, F. E., Seifert, S., Ilavsky, J., Shah, N., Kelly, K. E., Sarofim, A.
and Huffman, G. P. (2004), Size-range analysis of diesel soot with ultra-small
angle X-ray scattering, Combustion and Flame, 137, 63-72.
Bridgman, H. (1998), Particulate air pollution and meteorology in the upper Hunter
Valley, In Geotechnical engineering and engineering geology in the Hunter
Valley(Eds, Fityus, S., Hitchcock, P., Allman, M. and Delaney, M.), Conference
Publications, Springwood NSW 2777, University of Newcastle, pp. 185-197.
Bridgman, H. A. (1989), Acid rain studies in Australia and New Zealand, Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 18, 137-146.
Bridgman, H. A. (1992), Evaluating rainwater contamination and sources in southeast
Australia using factor analysis, Atmospheric Environment, 26A, 2401-2412.
Bridgman, H. A. and Cameron, C. (2000), Air quality, In Advances in environmental
management in the Hunter region, (Eds: Whitehead, J. H., Geary, P. M. and
Kidd, R. W.), Hunter Environmental Institute, Marrickville, NSW 2204, pp.
188-209.
Bridgman, H. A. and McManus, P. (2000), Weather, climate and air quality: the
Hunter's atmosphere, In Journeys: The making of the Hunter Region, (Eds:
McManus, P., O'Neill, P. and Loughran, R.), Allen & Unwin, St Leonards,
Sydney, NSW, Australia, pp. 42-66.
Briggs, G. A. (1975), Plume rise predictions, In Lectures on air pollution and
environmental impact analysis; presented at the AMS Workshop on Meteorology
and Environmental Assessment, American Meteorological Society, Boston,
Mass., pp. 59-111.
Brimblecombe, P. (1987), The big smoke: a history of air pollution in London since
medieval times, Methuen, London; New York.
Buhre, B. J. P., Hinkley, J. T., Gupta, R. and Wall, T. F. (2001), Fine particles from coal
combustion: formation and characterisation, In 18th International Pittsburgh
Coal Conference, Vol. cd-rom, (Ed, Conference, P. C.), Pittsburgh Coal
Conference, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, pp. Paper # 22-3.
Burkard (2000), Agronomic product data sheet - Burkard 7 day recording volumetric
spore sampler, 12/12/01, Burkard Scientific Agronomics Division,
http://www.burkardscientific.co.uk/Agronomics/Agronomics_Product_Spore_sa
mpler.htm
Burkard (2002), Personal communication, email of 25/1/02, (Ed, Hinkley, J.), pp. email
from Bryan Willi and Burkard Scientific.
Buseck, P. R. and Posfai, M. (1999), Airborne minerals and related aerosol particles:
effects on climate and the environment, Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 96, 3372-3379.
CAFE (2004), Second position paper on particulate matter, final draft, Clean Air for
Europe Working Group on Particulate Matter, 24/01/05, European Commission,
162
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/air/cafe/pdf/working_groups/2nd_positi
on_paper_pm.pdf
Carr, R. C. and Smith, W. B. (1984), Fabric filter technology for utility coal-fired power
plants, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 34, 79-89.
Carras, J. N. (1995), The transport and dispersion of plumes from tall stacks, In
Environmental aspects of trace elements in coal, (Eds: Swaine, D. J. and
Goodarzi, F.), Kluwer Academic Publishers Ltd, Dordrecht, The Netherlands,
pp. 146-177.
Carras, J. N., Lange, A. L., Thomson, C. J. and Williams, D. J. (1992), Behaviour of the
power station plumes in the Hunter Valley/Central Coast region of NSW,
Volume I: results of the intensive field campaigns, CSIRO, Sydney, pp. 120
(approx).
Carras, J. N. and Williams, D. J. (1988), Measurements of relative σy up to 1800km
from a single source, Atmospheric Environment, 22, 1061-1069.
Cereda, E., Marcazzan, G. M. B., Grime, G. W. and Mattachini, F. (1996), Macroscopic
and microscopic approach to the study of enrichment phenomena in the
electrostatic precipitation of coal fly ash particles, Nuclear Instruments &
Methods in Physics Research Section B-Beam Interactions with Materials &
Atoms, 109, 696-700.
CEU (1999), COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit
values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate
matter and lead in ambient air, In Official Journal L163, 29.06.1999.
Chambers, A. J. and Bridgman, H. A. (1983), Air quality in the middle Hunter: the
extensive study periods, University of Newcastle, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 87.
Chambers, J., Bridgman, H. A. and Long, G. (1982), Dispersion of a buoyant plume
from tall stacks in the middle Hunter Valley, Clean Air (Aust.), 16, 68-73.
Chan, Y., Simpson, R. W., McTainsh, G. H. and Vowles, P. D. (1999a), Sources of
Brisbane airborne dusts from electron microprobe analysis of individual
particles, Clean Air (Aust.), 33, 26-31.
Chan, Y. C., Simpson, R. W., McTainsh, G. H., Vowles, P. D., Cohen, D. D. and
Bailey, G. M. (1997), Characterisation of chemical species in PM2.5 and PM10
aerosols in Brisbane, Australia, Atmospheric Environment, 31, 3773-3785.
Chan, Y. C., Simpson, R. W., McTainsh, G. H., Vowles, P. D., Cohen, D. D. and
Bailey, G. M. (1999b), Source apportionment of PM2.5 and PM10 aerosols in
Brisbane (Australia) by receptor modelling, Atmospheric Environment, 33,
3251-3268.
Chan, Y. C., Vowles, P. D., McTainsh, G. H., Simpson, R. W., Cohen, D. D., Bailey, G.
M. and McOrist, G. D. (2000), Characterisation and source identification of
PM10 aerosol samples collected with a high volume cascade impactor in
Brisbane (Australia), Science of the Total Environment, 262, 5-19.
Cheng, R. J., Mohnen, V. A., Shen, T. A., Current, M. and Hudson, J. B. (1976),
Characterization of particulates from power plants, Journal of the Air Pollution
Control Association, 26, 787-790.
Chow, J. C. and Watson, J. G. (1998), Guideline on speciated particulate monitoring,
2/9/02, Desert Research Institute,
www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/spec/drispec.pdf
Christian, G. D. and O'Reilly, J. E. (Eds.) (1986), Instrumental analysis, Allyn and
Bacon, Newton, Massachusetts, USA.
163
Clarke, L. B. and Sloss, L. L. (1992), Trace elements - emissions from coal combustion
and gasification, IEA Coal Research, London.
Clausnitzer, H. and Singer, M. J. (1999), Mineralogy of agricultural source soil and
respirable dust in California, Journal of Environmental Quality, 28, 1619-1629.
Cohen, D. D. (1992), Ion beam analysis techniques in aerosol analysis, Clean Air, 26,
113-121.
Cohen, D. D. (1997), Ion beam analysis methods in aerosol analysis, quality assurance
and inter-technique comparisons, Harmonization of Health Related
Environmental Measurements Using Nuclear and Isotopic Techniques,
Proceedings of an International Symposium, Hyderabad, India, Nov. 4-7, 1996,
457-472.
Cohen, D. D. (1998), Characterisation of atmospheric fine particles using IBA
techniques, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Section B-
Beam Interactions with Materials & Atoms, 138, 14-22.
Cohen, D. D., Bailey, G. M. and Kondepudi, R. (1996), Elemental analysis by PIXE
and other IBA techniques and their application to source fingerprinting of
atmospheric fine particle pollution, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics
Research Section B-Beam Interactions with Materials & Atoms, 109/110, 218-
226.
Cohen, D. D., Stelcer, E., Hawas, O. and Garton, D. (2004), IBA methods for
characterisation of fine particulate atmospheric pollution: a local, regional and
global research problem, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research,
Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 219-220, 145-152.
CPCB (1994), National ambient air quality standards (India), 12/03/04, Central
Pollution Control Board, Government of India,
http://www.cpcb.delhi.nic.in/standard2.htm
Culling, C. F. A. (1974), Modern microscopy; elementary theory and practice,
Butterworths, London.
Czoschke, N. M., Jang, M. and Kamens, R. M. (2003), Effect of acidic seed on biogenic
secondary aerosol growth, Atmospheric Environment, 37, 4287-4299.
De Nevers, N. (1995), Air pollution control engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York.
DEFRA (2004), Expert group report on particulate matter. Chapter 5: Methods for
monitoring particulate concentrations, 24/1/05, Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs (UK),
http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/particulate%2Dmatter/
Desrosiers, R. E., Riehl, J. W., Ulrich, G. D. and Chiu, A. S. (1979), Submicron fly-ash
formation in coal-fired boilers, In Seventeenth Symposium (International) on
Combustion. The Combustion Institute, pp. 1395-1403.
Dockery, D. W., Pope, C. A., Xu, X. P., Spengler, J. D., Ware, J. H., Fay, M. E., Ferris,
B. G. and Speizer, F. E. (1993), An association between air pollution and
mortality in six U.S. cities, New England Journal of Medicine, 329, 1753-1759.
DUAP (1997), Upper Hunter cumulative impact study and action strategy, Department
of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP), Sydney, Australia, pp. 154.
Dye, A. L., Rhead, M. M. and Trier, C. J. (2000), The quantitative morphology of
roadside and background urban aerosol in Plymouth, UK, Atmospheric
Environment, 34, 3139-3148.
Dzubay, T. G. and Mamane, Y. (1989), Use of electron microscopy data in receptor
models for PM-10, Atmospheric Environment, 23, 467-476.
Erickson, T. A., Benson, S. A., Laumb, J. D., Jensen, R. R., Eylands, K. E. and D.P., M.
(2001), Particulate matter: trends and analysis using multiple sampling and
164
characterisation methods, In 18th International Pittsburgh Coal Conference,
Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, pp. CD-ROM Paper #
22-1.
Fisher, G. L., Prentice, B. A., Silberman, D., Ondov, J. M., Bierman, A. H., Ragaini, R.
C. and McFarland, A. R. (1978), Physical and morphological studies of size
classified fly ash, Environmental Science and Technology, 12, 447-451.
Fisher, N. S. and Wang, W. X. (1998), Trophic transfer of silver to marine herbivores -
a review of recent studies, Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry, 17, 562-571.
Frenz, D. A. (1999), Comparing pollen and spore counts collected with the rotorod
sampler and Burkard spore trap (Review), Annals of Allergy, Asthma, &
Immunology, 83, 341-347.
Fung, Y. S. and Wong, L. W. Y. (1995), Apportionment of air pollution sources by
receptor models in Hong Kong, Atmospheric Environment, 29, 2041-2048.
Garty, J., Weissman, L., Cohen, Y., Karnieli, A. and Orlovsky, L. (2001), Transplanted
lichens in and around the Mount Carmel National Park and the Haifa Bay
industrial region in Israel: Physiological and chemical responses, Environmental
Research, 85, 159-176.
Ghosal, S. and Self, S. A. (1995), Particle size-density relation and cenosphere content
of coal fly ash, Fuel, 74, 522-529.
Gibbon, D. L. (1979), Microcharacterisation of fly-ash and analogs: the role of SEM
and TEM, Scanning Electron Microscopy, 1, 501-510.
Glikson, M., Rutherford, S., Simpson, R. W., Mitchell, C. A. and Yago, A. (1995),
Microscopical and submicron components of atmospheric particulate matter
during high asthma periods in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia., Atmospheric
Environment, 29, 549-562.
Glikson, M., Simpson, R., Polach, H. and Taylor, J. (1988), Microscopical TSP studies
comparing a city centre and suburban sites in Canberra, Australia, Atmospheric
Environment, 22, 1745-1758.
Goldstein, J. I. (2003), Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis, Kluwer
Academic/Plenum, New York.
Gonzalez, C. M. and Pignata, M. L. (1997), Chemical response of the lichen Punctelia
Subrudecta (nyl.) krog transplanted close to a power station in an urban-
industrial environment, Environmental Pollution, 97, 195-203.
Graham, K. A. and Sarofim, A. F. (1997), Inorganic aerosols and their role in catalyzing
sulfuric acid production in furnaces, Journal of the Air and Waste Management
Association, 48, 106-112.
Gras, J. L., Keywood, M. D. and Ayers, G. P. (2001), Factors controlling winter-time
aerosol light scattering in Launceston, Tasmania, Atmospheric Environment, 35,
1881-1889.
Green, D., Fuller, G. and Barratt, B. (2001), Evaluation of TEOMTM 'correction
factors' for assessing the EU Stage 1 limit values for PM10, Atmospheric
Environment, 35, 2589-2593.
Guthrie, A. C. M. and Lamb, A. N. (1976), Ground level concentrations from power
station emissions, Clean Air (Aust), 10, 25-32.
Hall, P. (1983), Inverting an Edgeworth expansion, The Annals of Statistics, 11, 569-
576.
Hanna, S. R., Briggs, G. A. and Hosker, R. P. J. (1982), Handbook on atmospheric
diffusion, Technical Information Center, U.S. Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge,
Tenn.
Harris, R. J. (1985), A primer of multivariate statistics, Academic Press, Orlando.
165
Harrison, R. M. and Yin, J. X. (2000), Particulate matter in the atmosphere: which
particle properties are important for its effects on health? Science of the Total
Environment, 249, 85-101.
Heeley, P. (2001), The use of fabric filters on low sulphur coals, In 18th International
Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Vol. cd-rom, (Ed, Conference, P. C.), Pittsburgh
Coal Conference, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, pp. Paper # 49-2.
Helble, J. J. (2000), A model for the air emissions of trace metallic elements from coal
combustors equipped with electrostatic precipitators, Fuel Processing
Technology, 63, 125-147.
Helble, J. J., Mojtahedi, W., Lyyranen, J., Jokiniemi, J. and Kauppinen, E. (1996),
Trace element partitioning during coal gasification, Fuel, 75, 931-939.
Held, T., Chang, D. P. Y. and Niemeier, D. A. (2003), UCD 2001: an improved model
to simulate pollutant dispersion from roadways, Atmospheric Environment, 37,
5325-5336.
Helstroom, R., Carras, J. N., Prokopiuk, A. J., Chase, D. R., Sapounas, J., Buhre, B. and
Nelson, P. F. (2002), Fine particle emissions from power stations, Cooperative
Research Centre for Coal in Sustainable Development (CCSD), Pullenvale,
QLD 4069, Australia, pp. 26.
Henry, R. C. (1991), Multivariate receptor models, In Receptor modelling for air quality
management, (Ed, Hopke, P. K.), Elsevier; Distributors in the United States and
Canada Elsevier Science Pub. Co., New York, NY, USA, pp. 117-147.
Henry, R. C. and Hidy, G. M. (1979), Multivariate analysis of particulate sulfate and
other air quality variables by principal components. Part I. Annual data from Los
Angeles and New York, Atmospheric Environment (1967-1989), 13, 1581-96.
Hewitt, C. N. (2001), The atmospheric chemistry of sulphur and nitrogen in power
station plumes, Atmospheric Environment, 35, 1155-1170.
Hidy, G. M. (1994), Atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen oxides: eastern North American
source receptor relationships, Academic Press, San Diego.
Hidy, G. M. (2002), Multiscale impact of fuel consumption on air quality, Energy &
Fuels, 16, 270-281.
Hillamo, R. E. and Kauppinen, E. I. (1991), On the performance of the Berner low
pressure impactor, Aerosol Science and Technology, 14, 33-47.
Hock, J. L. and Lichtman, D. (1983), A comparative study of in-plume and in-stack
collected individual coal particles, Atmospheric Environment, 17, 849-852.
Huang, C. H. and Tsai, C. J. (2001), Effect of gravity on particle collection efficiency of
inertial impactors, Journal of Aerosol Science, 32, 375-387.
Huang, X., Olmez, I. and Aras, N. K. (1994), Emissions of trace elements from motor
vehicles: potential marker elements and source composition profile, Atmospheric
Environment, 28, 1385-91.
Hurley, P. (2000), The air pollution model (TAPM): summary of some recent
verification work in Australia, In 15th International Clean Air & Environment
Conference - CASANZ, Vol. 1, CASANZ, Sydney, Australia, pp. 98-103.
Hurley, P., Manins, P., Lee, S., Boyle, R., Ng, Y. L. and Dewundege, P. (2003), Year-
long, high-resolution, urban airshed modeling: verification of TAPM predictions
of smog and particles in Melbourne, Australia, Atmospheric Environment, 37,
1899-1910.
Hurley, P. J. (1999), The air pollution model (TAPM) version 1: technical description
and examples, CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Melbourne.
Hurley, P. J., Blockley, A. and Rayner, K. (2001), Verification of a prognostic
meteorological and air pollution model for year-long predictions in the Kwinana
166
industrial region of Western Australia, Atmospheric Environment, 35, 1871-
1880.
IPCC (1996), Climate change 1995: the science of climate change, Cambridge
University Press, New York.
Jacko, R. B. and Neuendorf, D. W. (1977), Trace metal particulate emission test results
from a number of industrial and municipal point sources, Journal of the Air
Pollution Control Association, 27, 989-994.
Jakeman, A. J. and Simpson, R. W. (1987), Air quality and resource development: a risk
assessment in the Hunter region in Australia, Centre for Resource and
Environmental Studies, Canberra.
Jakeman, A. J., Simpson, R. W., Butt, J. A. and Daly, N. J. (1985), The effect of
atmospheric pollutant emissions in the Upper Hunter region. Part 1: analysis
and modelling of sulfur dioxide, Clean Air (Aust), 19, 9-16.
Jalkanen, L., Makinen, A., Hasanen, E. and Juhanoja, J. (2000), The effect of large
anthropogenic particulate emissions on atmospheric aerosols, deposition and
bioindicators in the eastern Gulf of Finland region, Science of the Total
Environment, 262, 123-136.
Jang, M. and Kamens, R. M. (2001), Atmospheric secondary aerosol formation by
heterogeneous reactions of aldehydes in the presence of a sulfuric acid aerosol
catalyst, Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 4758-4766.
John, W. and Reischl, G. (1978), Measurements of the filtration efficiencies of selected
filter types, Atmospheric Environment, 12, 2015-2019.
Johnson, D. E. (1998), Applied multivariate methods for data analysts, Duxbury Press,
Pacific Grove, CA.
Jylha, K. (1995), Deposition around a coal-fired power station during a wintertime
precipitation event, Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 85, 2125-2130.
Kauppinen, E. I. and Pakkanen, T. A. (1990), Coal combustion aerosols: a field study,
Environmental Science and Technology, 24, 1811-1818.
Keywood, M., Ayers, G., Gras, J. and Cohen, D. (2000), Size-resolved chemistry of
Australian urban aerosol, In 15th International Clean Air and Environment
Conference(Ed, Zealand, C. A. S. o. A. a. N.), Mitcham, Sydney, Australia, pp.
550-555.
Khosah, R. P. and McManus, T. J. (2001), Ambient fine particulate matter (PM25)
sampling and analysis in the Upper Ohio River Valley (Pennsylvania, USA),
Proceedings - Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, 18th, 1043-
1084.
Khosah, R. P., McManus, T. J., Agbede, R. O. and Feeley, T. J., III (2000), Ambient
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) sampling and analysis in the upper Ohio River
Valley, Prepr. Symp. - Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Fuel Chem., 45, 45-49.
Kiely, G. (1998), Environmental Engineering, McGraw Hill Europe.
Kim, W.-s., Kim, S. H., Lee, D. W., Lee, S., Lim, C. S. and Ryu, J. H. (2001), Size
analysis of automobile soot particles using field-flow fractionation,
Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 1005-1012.
Krewski, D., Burnett, R. T., Goldberg, M. S., Hoover, K., Siemiatycki, J., Jerrett, M.,
Abrahamowicz, M. and White, W. H. (2000), Reanalysis of the Harvard six
cities study and the American Cancer Society study of particulate air pollution
and mortality, 5/9/01, Health Effects Institute,
http://www.healtheffects.org/Pubs/Rean-ExecSumm.pdf
167
Kuik, P. and Wolterbeek, H. T. (1995), Factor analysis of atmospheric trace-element
deposition data in the Netherlands obtained by moss monitoring, Water, Air, &
Soil Pollution, 84, 323-346.
Laden, F., Neas, L. M., Dockery, D. W. and Schwartz, J. (2000), Association of fine
particulate matter from different sources with daily mortality in six US cities,
Environmental Health Perspectives, 108, 941-947.
Lauf, R. J. (1985), Characterisation of the mineralogy and microchemistry of fly ash,
Nuclear and Chemical Waste Management, 5, 231-236.
Lichtman, D. and Mroczkowski, S. (1985), Scanning electron microscopy and energy
dispersive X-ray spectroscopy analysis of submicrometer coal fly ash particles,
Environmental Science and Technology, 19, 274-277.
Lighty, J. S., Veranth, J. M. and Sarofim, A. F. (2000), Combustion aerosols: factors
governing their size and composition and implications to human health, Journal
of the Air and Waste Management Association, 50, 1565-1618.
Linton, R. W., Loh, A. and Natusch, D. F. S. (1976), Surface predominance of trace
elements in airborne particles, Science, 191, 852-854.
Linton, R. W., Williams, P. and Evans, C. A. (1977), Determination of the surface
predominance of toxic elements in airborne particles by ion microprobe mass
spectrometry and auger electron spectrometry, Analytical Chemistry, 49, 1514-
1521.
Liu, B. Y. B., Srinivasachar, S. and Helble, J. J. (2000), The effect of chemical
composition on the fractal-like structure of combustion-generated inorganic
aerosols, Aerosol Science & Technology, 33, 459-469.
Luhar, A. K. and Hurley, P. J. (2003), Evaluation of TAPM, a prognostic
meteorological and air pollution model, using urban and rural point-source data,
Atmospheric Environment, 37, 2795-2810.
Mackay, A. W. and Rose, N. L. (1998), Characterisation and temporal distribution of
atmospheric particulates (PM10s) in central London, Advances in Air Pollution,
5, 947-957.
Malfroy, H., Davies, P. and Bell, D. (1993), Ambient dust depositions in the Hunter
Valley, Pacific Power, Newcastle, pp. 29.
Mamane, Y. and Dzubay, T. G. (1986), Characteristics of individual particles at a rural
site in the eastern United States, Journal of the Air Pollution Control
Association, 36, 906-11.
Mamane, Y., Miller, J. L. and Dzubay, T. G. (1986), Characterisation of individual fly
ash particles emitted from coal- and oil-fired power plants, Atmospheric
Environment, 20, 2125-2135.
Manz, M., Weissflog, L., Kuhne, R. and Schuurmann, G. (1999), Ecotoxicological
hazard and risk assessment of heavy metal contents in agricultural soils of
central Germany, Ecotoxicology & Environmental Safety, 42, 191-201.
Marple, V. A. and Liu, B. Y. H. (1974), Characteristics of laminar jet impactors,
Environmental Science and Technology, 8, 648-654.
Marple, V. A. and Willeke, K. (1976), Inertial impactors: theory, design and use, In
Fine particles: aerosol generation, measurement, sampling and analysis, (Ed,
Liu, B. Y. H.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 411-446.
Mastalerz, M., Glikson, M. and Simpson, R. W. (1998), Analysis of atmospheric
particulate matter - application of optical and selected geochemical techniques,
International Journal of Coal Geology, 37, 143-153.
McElroy, M. W., Carr, R. C., Ensor, D. S. and Markowski, R. (1982), Size distribution
of fine particles from coal combustion, Science, 215, 13-19.
168
Mehra, A., Farago, M. E. and Banerjee, D. K. (1998), Impact of fly ash from coal-fired
power stations in Delhi, with particular reference to metal contamination,
Environmental Monitoring & Assessment, 50, 15-35.
Meij, R., Kooij, J. V. D., Sloot, H. A. V. D., Koppius-Odink, J. M. and Clement, L. J.
(1985), Emissions and control of particulates of coal-fired power plants, In
Second US-Dutch International Symposium on Aerosols(Eds, Lee, S. D.,
Schneider, T., Grant, L. D. and Verkerk, P. J.), Lewis Publishers, Chelsea,
Michigan, Williamsburg, VA, USA, pp. 427-440.
Molnar, P., Janhall, S. and Hallquist, M. (2002), Roadside measurements of fine and
ultrafine particles at a major road north of Gothenburg, Atmospheric
Environment, 36, 4115-4123.
MSC (2003), State of the Environment Report 2002/2003, Muswellbrook Shire Council,
Muswellbrook, pp. 88.
Muller, K., Spindler, G., Maenhaut, W., Hitzenberger, R., Wieprecht, W.,
Baltensperger, U. and ten Brink, H. (2004), INTERCOMP2000, a campaign to
assess the comparability of methods in use in Europe for measuring aerosol
composition, Atmospheric Environment, 38, 6459-6466.
Natusch, D. F. S., Wallace, J. R. and Evans, C. A. (1974), Toxic trace elements:
preferential concentration in respirable particles, Science, 183, 202-204.
NEPC (1998), National Environment Protection Measure for ambient air quality,
7/9/2001, National Environment Protection Council, http://www.nepc.gov.au/
NEPC (2003), Variation to the national environment protection (ambient air quality)
measure, 20/11/03, National Environment Protection Council (NEPC).
http://www.ephc.gov.au/pdf/Air_Variation_PM25/PM2_5_Variation.pdf
NERDDC (1988), Project No 921: Air pollution from surface coal mining:
measurement, modelling and community perception, National energy research
development and demonstration council, Sydney, NSW, pp. 174.
Neville, M., McCarthy, J. F. and Sarofim, A. F. (1983), Size fractionation of
submicrometer coal combustion aerosol for chemical analysis, Atmospheric
Environment, 17, 2599-2604.
Noble, C. A. and Prather, K. A. (1996), Real-time measurement of correlated size and
composition profiles of individual atmospheric aerosol particles, Environmental
Science & Technology, 30, 2667-2680.
NPI (2002), National Pollutant Inventory, 12/06/2002, Environment Australia,
http://www.npi.gov.au/index.html
NPI (2003), Emission Report - Macquarie Generation, 20/04/2004, Environment
Australia, http://www.npi.gov.au/index.html
NSWEPA (2001), EPA on-line license fee calculator, 7/9/2001, NSW EPA,
http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/licensing/licencefees.htm#calculating
O'Connor, B. H., Chang, W. J. and Martin, D. P. (1981), Chemical characterisation of
atmospheric aerosol in Perth, Western Australia, In 7th International Clean Air
Conference(Eds, Webb, K. A. and Smith, A. J.), Ann Arbor Science Publishers,
Adelaide, Australia, pp. 639-652.
O'Keefe, C. A., Watne, T. M. and Hurley, J. P. (2000), Development of advanced
scanning electron microscopy techniques for characterization of submicron ash,
Powder Technology, 108, 95-102.
Padmanabhamurty, B. and Gupta, R. N. (1977), Particulate pollution in Delhi due to
Indraprastha power plant, Indian Journal of Meteorology Hydrology and
Geophysics, 28, 375-384.
169
Patel, C. B. and Pandey, G. S. (1986), Alkalinization of soil through thermal power
plant fly ash fallout, The Science of the Total Environment, 57, 67-72.
PCD (1995), Ambient Air Standards of Thailand (1995), 12/3/04, Pollution Control
Department (PCD), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment,
http://www.pcd.go.th/Information/Regulations/air_noise/Airquality.htm#AirQua
lity
Pershing, D. W. and Wendt, J. O. L. (1979), Relative contributions of volatile nitrogen
and char nitrogen to NOx emissions from pulverized coal flames, Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development, 18, 60.
Physick, W. (2002), Stack characteristics and Liddell stack co-ordinates, (Ed, Hinkley,
J.), pp. series of emails.
Physick, W. L., Noonan, J. A. and Manins, P. C. (1991), Air quality modelling study of
the Hunter Valley. Phase 1: emitters in the Upper Hunter, CSIRO Division of
Atmospheric Research, Aspendale (Melbourne), Victoria, pp. 102.
Pio, C. A., Castro, L. M., Cerqueira, M. A., Santos, I. M., Belchior, F. and Salgueiro,
M. L. (1996), Source assessment of particulate air pollutants measured at the
southwest European coast, Atmospheric Environment, 30, 3309-3320.
Posfai, M., Anderson, J. R., Buseck, P. R., Shattuck, T. W. and Tindale, N. W. (1994),
Constituents of a remote Pacific marine aerosol: a TEM study, Atmospheric
Environment, 28, 1747-56.
Posfai, M., Xu, H., Anderson, J. R. and Buseck, P. R. (1998), Wet and dry sizes of
atmospheric aerosol particles: an AFM-TEM study, Geophysical Research
Letters, 25, 1907-1910.
Quann, R. J., Neville, M. and Sarofim, A. F. (1990), A laboratory study of the effect of
coal selection on the amount and composition of combustion generated
submicron particles, Combustion Science and Technology, 74, 245-265.
Querol, X., Alastuey, A., Lopez-Soler, A. and Plana, F. (2000), Levels and chemistry of
atmospheric particulates induced by a spill of heavy metal mining wastes in the
Donana area, Southwest Spain, Atmospheric Environment, 34, 239-253.
Querol, X., Alastuey, A., Lopez-Soler, A., Plana, F., Mantilla, E., Juan, R., Ruiz, C. R.
and La Orden, A. (1999), Characterisation of atmospheric particulates around a
coal-fired power station, International Journal of Coal Geology, 40, 175-188.
Querol, X., Fernandezturiel, J. L. and Lopezsoler, A. (1995), Trace elements in coal and
their behaviour during combustion in a large power station, Fuel, 74, 331-343.
Raask, E. (1985), Mineral impurities in coal combustion, Hemisphere Publishing,
Washington.
Ramsden, A. R. and Shibaoka, M. (1982), Characterisation and analysis of individual
fly-ash particles from coal fired power stations by a combination of optical
microscopy, electron microscopy and quantitative electron microprobe analysis,
Atmospheric Environment, 16, 2191-2206.
Razmovski, V., O'Meara, T., Hjelmroos, M., Marks, G. and Tovey, E. (1998), Adhesive
tapes as capturing surfaces in Burkard sampling, Grana, 37, 305-310.
Reis, M. A., Alves, L. C., Wolterbeek, H. T., Verburg, T., Freitas, M. C. and Gouveia,
A. (1996), Main atmospheric heavy metal sources in Portugal by biomonitor
analysis, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Section B-Beam
Interactions with Materials & Atoms, 109, 493-497.
Rogers, G. F. C. and Mayhew, Y. R. (1980), Thermodynamic and transport properties
of fluids (SI units), Basil Blackwell, Worcester.
Rothe, M. (2003), Personal communication, (Ed, Hinkley, J.).
170
Rubow, K. L., Marple, V. A., Olin, J. and McCawley, M. A. (1987), A personal cascade
impactor: design, evaluation and calibration, American Industrial Hygiene
Association journal, 48, 532-8.
Sawidis, T., Chettri, M. K., Papaioannou, A., Zachariadis, G. and Stratis, J. (2001), A
study of metal distribution from lignite fuels using trees as biological monitors,
Ecotoxicology & Environmental Safety, 48, 27-35.
Schwartz, J., Dockery, D. W. and Neas, L. M. (1996), Is daily mortality associated
specifically with fine particles?, Journal of the Air & Waste Management
Association, 46, 927-939.
Seames, W. S. (2003), An initial study of the fine fragmentation fly ash particle mode
generated during pulverised coal combustion, Fuel Processing Technology, 81,
109-125.
Sivacoumar, R., Bhanarkar, A. D., Goyal, S. K., Gadkari, S. K. and Aggarwal, A. L.
(2000), Air pollution modeling for an industrial complex and model
performance evaluation, Environmental Pollution (Oxford, United Kingdom),
111, 471-477.
Sloss, L. L. (1998), Sampling and analysis of PM10/PM2.5, IEA Coal Research,
London, UK.
Smith, I. M. and Sloss, L. L. (1998), PM10/PM2.5 - emissions and effects, IEA Coal
Research, London, UK.
Smith, R. D., Campbell, J. A. and Nielson, K. K. (1979), Characterization and
formation of submicron particles in coal-fired plants, Atmospheric Environment,
13, 607-617.
Smoot, L. D. (1991), Coal and char combustion, In Fossil fuel combustion: a source
book, (Eds: Bartok, W. and Sarofim, A. F.), Wiley, New York, pp. 653-781.
Song, X. H., Polissar, A. V. and Hopke, P. K. (2001), Sources of fine particle
composition in the northeastern US, Atmospheric Environment, 35, 5277-5286.
Stern, A. C. (1986), Air pollution vol VI: supplement to air pollutants, their
transformation, transport and effects, Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.
Suarez, A. E. and Ondov, J. M. (2002), Ambient aerosol concentrations of elements
resolved by size and source: contributions of some cytokine-active metals from
coal- and oil-fired power plants, Energy & Fuels, 16, 562-568.
Swaine, D. J. (1984), Environmental consequences of coal combustion, CSIRO,
Institute of Energy and Earth Resources, Division of Fossil Fuels.
Swaine, D. J. (1994), Trace elements in coal and their dispersal during combustion,
Fuel Processing Technology, 39, 121-137.
Swift, J. A. (1970), Electron microscopes, Kogan Page, London.
Tataruch, F. (1995), Red deer antlers as biomonitors for lead contamination, Bulletin of
Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, 55, 332-337.
ten Brink, H. M., Janssen, A. J. and Slanina, J. (1988), Plume wash-out near a coal fired
power plant: measurements and model calculations, Atmospheric Environment,
22, 177-187.
Thurston, G. D. (1981), Multivariate analysis of particulate sulfate and other air quality
variables by principal components. Part I. Annual data from Los Angeles and
New York. Comments, Atmospheric Environment (1967-1989), 15, 424-5.
Thurston, G. D. and Spengler, J. D. (1985), A quantitative assessment of source
contributions to inhalable particulate matter pollution in metropolitan Boston,
Atmospheric Environment (1967-1989), 19, 9-25.
TSI (2001), Model 3089 nanometer aerosol sampler - instruction manual, 19/9/01, TSI,
http://www.tsi.com/particle/product/pdf/3089.pdf
171
TSI (2003), Models 3012/3012A aerosol neutralizers - instruction manual, 9/12/2003,
TSI, http://www.tsi.com/particle/downloads/manuals/1933012k-3012A.pdf
Tuyl, F. (2003), Particle size data, (Ed, Hinkley, J.), Newcastle, Australia, pp.
spreadsheet with modified Edgeworth expansion.
USEPA (1995), Compilation of air pollutant emission factors. AP-42, fifth edition,
volume I chapter 1: external combustion sources, 4/9/01, USEPA,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/final/c01s01.pdf
USEPA (2003a), 40 CFR Part 51 Revision to the guideline on air quality models:
adoption of a preferred long range transport model and other revisions; final
rule, 9/06/04, http://www.epa.gov/scram001/tt25.htm#guidance
USEPA (2003b), Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate
matter: policy assessment of scientific and technical tnformation. OAQPS staff
paper - first draft. EPA-452/D-03-001, 24/01/05, Environmental Protection
Agency,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/pm_staff_paper_august2003_1
stdraft.pdf
Vann Bush, P., Snyder, T. R. and Chang, R. L. (1989), Determination of baghouse
performance from coal and ash properties: Part II, Journal of the Air and Waste
Management Association, 39, 361-372.
Virtanen, A. K. K., Ristimaeki, J. M., Vaaraslahti, K. M. and Keskinen, J. (2004), Effect
of Engine Load on Diesel Soot Particles, Environmental Science and
Technology, 38, 2551-2556.
Wall, T. F., Wibberley, L. J. and Phong-anant, D. (1982), Environmental aspects of coal
combustion: fly ash, NOx and SOx, In Coal, properties, analysis and effective
use, (Ed, Wall, T. F.), The Institute of Coal Research, University of Newcastle,
Newcastle, Australia, pp. 9-1 to 9-29.
Wangen, L. E. and Williams, M. D. (1980), Elemental deposition downwind of a coal-
fired power plant, Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 10, 33-44.
Watson, J. G. and Chow, J. C. (1994), Clear sky visibility as a challenge for society,
Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 19, 241-266.
Weast, R. C., Astle, M. J. and Beyer, W. H. (Eds.) (1986), CRC handbook of chemistry
and physics, CRC Press.
Weckwerth, G. (2001), Verification of traffic emitted aerosol components in the
ambient air of Cologne (Germany), Atmospheric Environment, 35, 5525-5536.
Wentzel, M., Gorzawski, H., Naumann, K. H., Saathoff, H. and Weinbruch, S. (2003),
Transmission electron microscopical and aerosol dynamical characterization of
soot aerosols, Journal of Aerosol Science, 34, 1347-1370.
WHO (1999), Guidelines for air quality, 19/7/2001, World Health Organisation,
Geneva, http://www.who.int/peh/air/Airqualitygd.htm
WHO (2003), Health aspects of air pollution with particulate matter, ozone and nitrogen
dioxide. Report on a WHO Working Group. Bonn, Germany 13–15 January
2003. EUR/03/5042688, 24/1/2005, Health Documentation Services, WHO
Regional Office for Europe, http://www.euro.who.int/document/e79097.pdf
Wibberley, L. J. and Wall, T. F. (1986), An investigation of factors affecting the
physical characteristics of fly ash formed in a laboratory scale combustor,
Combustion Science and Technology, 48, 177-190.
Wichmann, H., Spix, C., Tuch, T., Wolke, G., Peters, A., Heinrich, J., Kreyling, W. G.
and Heyder, J. (2000), Daily mortality and fine and ultrafine particles in Erfurt,
Germany. Part I: Role of particle number and particle mass, 5/9/01, Health
Effects Institute, http://www.healtheffects.org/Pubs/Wichmann.pdf
172
Williams, D. J., Carras, J. N., Milne, J. W. and Heggies, A. C. (1981), The oxidation
and long-range transport of sulfur dioxide in a remote region., Atmospheric
Environment, 15, 2255-62.
Wilson, W. E. and Suh, H. H. (1997), Fine particles and coarse particles - concentration
relationships relevant to epidemiologic studies, Journal of the Air & Waste
Management Association, 47, 1238-1249.
Wolf, M. E. and Hidy, G. M. (1997), Aerosols and climate - anthropogenic emissions
and trends for 50 years, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 102,
11113-11121.
Ziomas, I. C., Tzoumaka, P., Balis, D., Melas, D., Zerefos, C. S. and Klemm, O. (1998),
Ozone episodes in Athens, Greece. A modeling approach using data from the
MEDCAPHOT-TRACE, Atmospheric Environment, 32, 2313-2321.
Zou, L. (2000), Elemental composition and morphology of size-resolved brown coal fly
ash particles, In 15th International Clean Air & Environment Conference -
CASANZ, Vol. 1, CASANZ, Sydney, Australia, pp. 428-431.
173
Appendix A: Calibration of Burkard Flow Tube
It was not possible to directly calibrate the Burkard flow tube due to the absence of
sufficient differentiation in the markings on the side of the tube. Instead, field readings
were made based on the distance from the top of the float to the centreline (the nominal
10 LPM marking) and this distance was calibrated against a 10 LPM rotameter, which
was in turn calibrated against a bubble tube. The rotameter calibration is shown in
Figure A-1(a) and the flow tube calibration in Figure A-1(b). The calibration indicates
a good linear response, although there is a slight suggestion of a sinusoidal “wobble”
about the line of best fit. The uncertainties associated with this determination are not
significant, as the flow readings were in general only used to ensure that the sampler
was operating properly and to estimate approximate flows for the capture efficiency
assessments in the text.
11 11
y = 0.9936x + 0.0762 y = 0.354x + 10.528
R2 = 0.9938 R2 = 0.9911
9 9
Fl owrat e (LPM)
Fl owrat e (LPM)
7 7
5 5
3 3
3 5 7 9 11 -18 -13 -8 -3
Rotameter Readi ng Fl ow Tu be Readi ng (mm)
174
Appendix B: Predicted Cutpoint of Spore Sampler
The following is taken from the excel spreadsheet used to determine the cutpoints, and
shows a simple sensitivity analysis of the effect of decreasing flowrate– the nominal
range is highlighted. Note that the slip factor is iteratively calculated.
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
Flowrate (LPM)
175
Case B: 2 mm Slot (i.e. standard sampler)
BURKARD SPORE TRAP - PREDICTED CUTPOINT
after Marple & Willeke
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
Flowrate (LPM)
Note the significantly higher cutpoints at the nominal flow range of 7.5 to 9.5 LPM.
176
Appendix C: Predicted Cutpoints of Cascade Impactor
The following is taken from the excel spreadsheet used to determine the cutpoints, and
shows the predicted cutpoints of the individual impactor stages. The Stokes number is
estimated from a linear regression on data taken from a plot in the paper of Marple and
Willeke (1976). Note that the slip factor is iteratively calculated as with the Burkard
spore sampler calculations. It will also be seen that the velocity in the final stage is
slightly above one third of the speed of sound, and the assumption that the gas is
incompressible may be incorrect (although the impact is expected to be minimal).
177
Case B: Nominal Cutpoints Assuming Particle Density of 1500 kgm-3
178
Appendix D: Correlation of PM10 with SO2
The output from SPSS analysis of the SO2 and PM10 data is reproduced below, together
with brief explanatory comments.
Comments: the low R and R squared indicate that the model is poor in explaining all
the variance in the data set i.e. other factors than SO2 are major contributors to PM10.
Sum of
Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 1570.155 1 1570.155 11.627 .001(a)
Residual 15125.292 112 135.047
Total 16695.447 113
a Predictors: (Constant), SO2
b Dependent Variable: PM10
Comments: shows the amount of variation in the data set explained by the regression
model and residual (unexplained variance).
Comments: shows the model coefficients (constant and slope) as well as students’ t
scores and significance i.e. the likelihood that the coefficients are in fact zero and the
variation in the data set is purely random. Both the constant and slope (SO2 term) are
significantly different from zero. The constant has quite a narrow confidence interval,
from 17.9 to 23.8 µg m-3, while the slope or SO2 dependency has a wider confidence
interval from 0.39 to 1.46 µg m-3 per ppb SO2.
179
Residual Plots
Histogram Scatterplot
Dependent Variable: PM10 Dependent Variable: PM10
20 4
10
1
0
Frequency
20 30 40 50
0
5
180
Appendix E: TAPM Simulation Details
Model Parameters
Three grid domains were used in this study, each consisting of 40 x 40 cells. The main
features of the model runs are summarised below:
• Grid centre: latitude -32 deg -23.5min, longitude 150 deg 58min.
• Grid Domains:
o 3 grids at 10, 3 and 1 km spacing (recommended ratio of around 3:1)
o Outer grid: 400 km x 400 km
o Number of vertical levels: 25 (10 m through to 8000 m)
o SST and deep soil parameters: default
• Spin up: an extra day was added at the start of each run to establish the wind
field, temperature profile etc. Results were discarded until the second day.
• Advanced/Experimental options:
o maximum wind speed = 30 m s-1
o synoptic pressure gradient scaling factor = 1
o synoptic pressure gradient, temperature & moisture filtering factor = 1
o synoptic conditions vary with 3-d space and time. Boundary conditions
on outer grid from Synoptic Analyses (as recommended)
o surface vegetation / prognostic eddy dissipation rate options selected
o non-hydrostatic pressure and rain processes options not selected
• Pollution:
o Model was run in Tracer mode with 3 tracers (APM, NOx, and SO2) with
no atmospheric chemistry (reactions) or deposition of either gas or
particulate matter.
o Pollution grid set at 500 m for maximum resolution
o Background pollution: zero for all tracer species
o Lagrangian Particle Mode (LPM) parameters: defaults (initial seed 15,
travel time 900 s, 1 particle per second, maximum number on grid
1,000,000)
o Source parameters: each of the two stacks at each station was treated as a
separate source. Source parameters were provided by CSIRO (Physick,
2002). Stack locations in longitude and latitude were converted to
181
Eastings and Northings (in metres) and the source positions calculated
relative to the grid centre. Buoyancy enhancements take effects of
proximity of the two stacks into account and were as recommended by
CSIRO. The emission rates were assumed constant in time and were
calculated from the volume emission rate and the concentrations
provided by Macquarie Generation (Rothe, 2003).
Bayswater Bayswater Liddell 1 Liddell 2
1 2
Location (from centre) -1532, -522 -1796, -404 956, 1990 927, 2144
Source Height (m) 250 250 168 168
Source Radius (m) 5.28 5.28 4.35 4.35
Buoyancy Enhancement 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4
-1
Exit Velocity (m s ) 23 23 22.2 22.2
Exit Temperature (K) 403 403 396 396
-1
Emission rate APM (g s ) * 16 16 11 11
-1
Emission rate NOx (g s ) 791 791 528 528
Emission rate SO2 ‡ 1365 1365 910 910
-3
* APM = total power station emissions; equivalent to 8 mg m at stack temperature
• Emission rates are slightly higher than the NPI based on these assumptions:
Station NPI PM10 TAPM NPI SOx TAMP SO2 NPI NOx NPI NOx
emissions PM10 emissions emissions emissions emissions
emissions
Bayswater 380,000 508,557 83,000,000 86,129,003 39,000,000 49,940,347
Liddell 290,000 333,177 36,000,000 57,424,218 18,000,000 33,296,395
Combined 570,000 841,734 119,000,000 143,553,221 57,000,000 83,236,742
• Scenarios: 12 monthly runs, from July 2002 through to June 2003 (as month
plus last day of preceding month to “spin-up”).
Sample Log File
Only the initial part of the file is shown here as the full .lis file would run to 2385 pages
(it is a 3.83MB text file).
|----------------------------------------|
| THE AIR POLLUTION MODEL (TAPM V2.0.1). |
| Copyright (C) CSIRO Australia. |
| All Rights Reserved. |
|----------------------------------------|
----------------
RUN INFORMATION:
----------------
NUMBER OF GRIDS= 3
GRID CENTRE (longitude,latitude)=( 150.966705 , -32.3916702 )
GRID CENTRE (cx,cy)=( 0 , 0 ) (m)
GRID DIMENSIONS (nx,ny,nz)=( 40 , 40 , 25 )
NUMBER OF VERTICAL LEVELS OUTPUT = 15
DATES (START,END)=( 20020831 , 20020930 )
DATE FROM WHICH OUTPUT BEGINS = 20020901
LOCAL HOUR IS GMT+ 10.1000004
SYNOPTIC WIND SPEED MAXIMUM = 30 (m/s)
SYNOPTIC PRESSURE-GRADIENT SCALING FACTOR = 1.00000000
SYNOPTIC PRESSURE-GRADIENT FILTERING FACTOR = 1.00000000
VARY SYNOPTIC WITH 3-D SPACE AND TIME
INCLUDE VEGETATION
EXCLUDE NON-HYDROSTATIC EFFECTS
EXCLUDE RAIN
INCLUDE PROGNOSTIC EDDY DISSIPATION RATE EQUATION
POLLUTION : 4 TRACERS (TR1,TR2,TR3,TR4)
EXCLUDE POLLUTANT CROSS-CORRELATION EQUATION
POLLUTANT GRID DIMENSIONS (nxf,nyf)=( 79 , 79 )
TR1 BACKGROUND = 0.00000000E+00 (ug/m3)
TR2 BACKGROUND = 0.00000000E+00 (ug/m3)
182
TR3 BACKGROUND = 0.00000000E+00 (ug/m3)
TR4 BACKGROUND = 0.500000000 (ug/m3)
TR1 DECAY RATE = 0.00000000E+00 (per second)
TR2 DECAY RATE = 0.00000000E+00 (per second)
TR3 DECAY RATE = 0.00000000E+00 (per second)
TR4 DECAY RATE = 0.00000000E+00 (per second)
TR1 EMISSION TEMPERATURE VARIATION:NONE
TR2 EMISSION TEMPERATURE VARIATION:NONE
TR3 EMISSION TEMPERATURE VARIATION:NONE
TR4 EMISSION TEMPERATURE VARIATION:NONE
---------------------------------
START GRID 1 C:\tapm\run\r100k\r100k
GRID SPACING (delx,dely)=( 10000 , 10000 ) (m)
POLLUTANT GRID SPACING (delxf,delyf)=( 5000 , 5000 ) (m)
NO MET. DATA ASSIMILATION FILE AVAILABLE
NO BUILDING FILE AVAILABLE
NUMBER OF PSE SOURCES= 4
NO LSE EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO ASE EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO GSE EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO BSE EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO WHE EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO VPX EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO VDX EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO VLX EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
NO VPV EMISSION FILE AVAILABLE
INITIALISE
LARGE TIMESTEP = 300.000000
METEOROLOGICAL ADVECTION TIMESTEP = 300.000000 (s)
Deep Soil Moisture Content (kg/kg)= 0.150000006
Deep Soil & Sea Temperatures (K) = 289.600006 289.600006
POLLUTION ADVECTION TIMESTEP = 300.000000 (s)
PSE KEY :
is = Source Number
ls = Source Switch (-1=Off,0=EGM,1=EGM+LPM)
xs,ys = Source Position (m)
hs = Source Height (m)
rs = Source Radius (m)
es = Buoyancy Enhancement Factor
fs_no = Fraction of NOX Emitted as NO
fs_fpm= Fraction of APM Emitted as FPM
INIT_PSE
is, ls, xs, ys, hs, rs, es, fs_no, fs_fpm
1, 1, -1532., -522., 250.00, 5.28, 1.30, 1.00, 0.50,
2, 1, -1796., -404., 250.00, 5.28, 1.30, 1.00, 0.50,
3, 1, 956., 1990., 168.00, 4.35, 1.40, 1.00, 0.50,
4, 1, 927., 2144., 168.00, 4.35, 1.40, 1.00, 0.50,
LAGRANGIAN (LPM) MODE IS OFF FOR THIS GRID
183
Appendix F: Cascade Impactor – Associated Errors
RUN SAMPLE F(197)Na(440) Mg(585) AL SI P S CL K CA TI V CR MN FE CO NI CU ZN BR SE SR PBL
NAME error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %error %
7 23/9-22/10 S1 64% 13% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 78% 38% 17% 11% 56% 23% 33% 27% 44% 240% 93%
8 S2 35% 12% 12% 11% 283% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 57% 22% 11% 59% 29% 50% 23% 34% 200% 58% 109%
9 S3 13% 22% 11% ##### 12% 11% 13% 12% 18% 80% 33% 100% 12% 600% 14% 100% 43% 25%
10 S4 25% 11% 167% 12% 11% 21% 28% 83% 75% 40% 13% 100% 17% 100% 67% 36%
11 S5 37% 40% 11% 115% 11% 12% 12% 30% 43% 40% 13% 50% 15% 67% 27% 33% 133% 300% 800%
12 22/10-24/10S1 13% 11% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 50% 33% 17% 11% 55% 70% 29% 25% 70% 100% 60%
13 S2 14% 13% 11% 450% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 67% 18% 11% 60% 14% 67% 57% 32% 157%
14 S3 12% 13% 11% 150% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 120% 100% 20% 11% 86% 31% 25% 27% 26% 367% 450%
15 S4 16% 16% 11% 68% 12% 12% 12% 13% 20% 60% 23% 11% 100% 43% 33% 50% 29% 100% 200% 200%
16 S5 39% 28% 11% 83% 11% 13% 12% 20% 26% 100% 33% 25% 11% 75% 15% 36% 24% 21% 150% 800%
17 24/10-28/10S1 35% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 15% 11% 38% 133% 25% 20% 18% 57% 53% 42%
18 S2 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 85% 16% 11% 47% 28% 28% 18% 22% 350% 76% #####
19 S3 11% 14% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 14% 23% 11% 108% 86% 20% 24% 25% 500% 188% 70%
20 S4 12% 18% 11% 108% 11% 11% 12% 12% 20% 36% 30% 11% 120% 43% 19% 22% 27% 100%
21 S5 20% 14% 11% 11% 14% 11% 38% 36% 32% 100% 42% 11% 100% 71% 36% 21% 22% 100%
22 28/10-26/11S1 15% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 52% 86% 14% 11% 19% 560% 16% 18% 20% 49% 36% 40%
23 S2 21% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 43% 14% 11% 25% 24% 17% 16% 37% 71% 106% 54%
24 S3 30% 12% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 70% 83% 29% 11% 89% 15% 41% 23% 62% 400% 57%
25 S4 11% 18% 11% 107% 11% 11% 11% 12% 15% 100% 67% 36% 11% 100% 22% 300% 15% 36% 71% 74%
26 S5 13% 52% 11% 38% 11% 17% 11% 15% 23% 60% 125% 36% 12% 150% 22% 67% 15% 29% 56% 42%
27 26/11-28/11S1 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 41% 13% 11% 41% 29% 25% 21% 50% 125% 49% 50%
28 S2 27% 12% 50% 11% 11% 400% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 32% 13% 11% 40% 45% 33% 23% 58% 100% 163% 87%
29 S3 12% 13% 11% 133% 11% 11% 11% 12% 12% 100% 36% 18% 11% 82% 19% 44% 25% 150% 250% 367%
30 S4 18% 58% 600% 11% 155% 11% 12% 18% 26% 54% 80% 33% 12% 63% 14% 100% 43% 50%
31 S5 80% 11% 85% 11% 12% 14% 90% 50% 50% 14% 150% 40% 50% 40% 67%
32 28/11-16/1S1 24% 12% 31% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 77% 44% 13% 11% 33% 60% 26% 22% 117% 250% 94% 79%
33 S2 24% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 50% 58% 13% 11% 38% 20% 28% 34% 117% 75% 50% 50%
34 S3 48% 12% 13% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 50% 45% 17% 11% 52% 20% 19% 31% 57% 167% 100% 275%
35 S4 22% 48% 110% 11% 213% 11% 12% 23% 36% 100% 400% 100% 13% 300% 27% 40% 33% 67%
36 S5 42% 90% 11% 127% 11% 12% 15% 32% 88% 86% 50% 27% 15% 38% 67% 25% 34% 133%
37 16/1-28/1S1 16% 13% 11% 150% 14% 11% 11% 12% 13% 38% 18% 11% 129% 15% 60% 33% 100% #####
38 S2 43% 12% 41% 12% 11% ##### 12% 11% 11% 12% 12% 67% 18% 11% 55% 20% 29% 40% 167% 367%
39 S3 13% 18% 11% 12% 11% 12% 13% 18% 125% 75% 50% 12% 20% 29% 29% 100% 600% 300%
40 S4 26% 35% 11% 186% 12% 17% 17% 23% 100% 33% 67% 15% 33% 100% 67% 100% 200%
41 S5 57% 12% 56% 11% 36% 12% 20% 40% 50% 13% 100% 33% 100% 50% 54% 100%
43 10/3-11/3 13% 40% 15% 11% 360% 13% 11% 12% 12% 15% 44% 33% 11% 75% 15% 43% 27% 58% 300%
44 S2 12% 76% 14% 11% 190% 12% 11% 12% 12% 17% 80% 23% 11% 67% 13% 31% 27% 67% 92% 129%
45 S3 18% 53% 26% 11% 533% 13% 12% 14% 13% 28% 150% 60% 11% 175% 13% 43% 50% 200% 800%
46 S4 51% 31% 11% 567% 11% 20% 31% 50% 57% 33% 50% 12% 400% 13% 300% 30% 400% 133%
47 S5 59% 87% 11% 118% 11% 39% 40% 63% 43% 50% 12% 80% 13% 200% 75% 38% 150% 100%
48 11/3-5/5S1 20% 13% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 50% 29% 14% 11% 32% 56% 21% 16% 60% 500% 100% 71%
49 S2 24% 13% 11% 11% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 27% 13% 11% 39% 41% 22% 22% 53% 150% 86% 81%
50 S3 15% 36% 12% 11% 243% 12% 18% 11% 11% 13% 80% 20% 11% 61% 15% 22% 24% 111%
51 S4 62% 18% 11% 74% 11% 13% 13% 21% 40% 33% 11% 233% 14% 60% 25% 83% 400% 600%
52 S5 258% 11% 24% 11% 13% 88% 75% 33% 50% 13% 300% 25% 40% 20% 36% 55% 50%
53 5/5-6/5S1 12% 43% 12% 11% 300% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 75% 83% 24% 11% 57% 14% 60% 20% 60% 300% 110% 65%
54 S2 21% 23% 11% 107% 12% 14% 15% 14% 86% 40% 60% 33% 12% 100% 13% 50% 43% 67% 267%
55 S3 44% 11% 76% 24% 22% 78% 117% 100% 60% 38% 14% 75% 17% 200% 40% 80%
56 S4 26% 11% 70% 12% 113% 32% 100% 75% 75% 18% 29% 67% 50%
57 S5 61% 48% 12% 87% 11% 450% 17% 37% 43% 75% 15% 75% 33% 50% 25% 300% 160%
58 6/5-8/5S1 20% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 27% 34% 11% 11% 21% 14% 14% 14% 81% 96% 59% 60%
59 S2 12% 12% 11% 633% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 113% 70% 14% 11% 38% 21% 19% 17% 41% 70% 49% 100%
60 S3 13% 13% 11% 214% 11% 11% 12% 11% 14% 44% 16% 11% 88% 21% 21% 30% 58% 300% 122% 367%
61 S4 35% 24% 11% 83% 11% 13% 14% 67% 44% 75% 38% 11% 175% 20% 25% 22% 100% 150% 62%
62 S5 47% 61% 11% 78% 11% 12% 16% 29% 30% 12% 150% 17% 33% 25% 33% 200% 72%
63 ?-10/6S1 31% 14% 11% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 33% 14% 11% 50% 32% 29% 18% 100% 120%
64 S2 29% 13% 12% 11% 567% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 42% 17% 11% 44% 20% 29% 19% 86% 133% 68% 125%
65 S3 13% 12% 11% 167% 11% 11% 12% 11% 13% 250% 50% 27% 11% 29% 24% 21% 75%
66 S4 47% 68% 27% 11% 88% 11% 17% 13% 36% 200% 30% 20% 12% 167% 15% 43% 33% 167% 100% 900%
67 S5 104% 11% 61% 11% 14% 25% 200% 38% 50% 13% 300% 22% 150% 38% 67% 75% 600% 52%
68 10/6-11/6 20% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 44% 42% 13% 11% 31% 37% 26% 13% 50% 64% 54% 40%
69 S2 13% 55% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 140% 83% 20% 11% 49% 67% 29% 17% 300% 400% 186%
70 S3 18% 15% 11% 93% 11% 13% 12% 12% 14% 56% 133% 22% 11% 100% 15% 24% 22% 86% 110%
71 S4 56% 48% 11% 48% 11% 500% 22% 25% 36% 33% 75% 12% 22% 40% 26% 100%
72 S5 113% 12% 67% 11% 12% 21% 29% 200% 50% 50% 13% 100% 25% 50% 25% 37% 79%
73 23/9-22/10F 86% 41% 11% 173% 12% 13% 27% 19% 225% 47% 86% 22% 50% 14% 44% 40% 44% 400% 200% 220%
74 22/10-24/10F 46% 14% 170% 16% 15% 37% 20% 150% 200% 300% 25% 500% 67% 100% 25% 35%
75 24/10-28/10F 14% 123% 14% 14% 35% 18% 140% 86% 21% 80% 40% 75% 26% 28% 200% ##### 109%
76 28/10-26/11F 47% 400% 12% 64% 12% 12% 22% 18% 100% 100% 21% 67% 43% 75% 33% 39% 125%
77 26/11-28/11F 40% 17% 61% 15% 14% 44% 18% 333% 400% 54% 67% 167% 100% 50% 25% 44%
78 28/11-16/1F 50% 14% 84% 12% 12% 29% 18% 225% 55% 167% 29% 200% 33% 30% 23% 31% 100%
79 16/1-28/1F 41% 43% 14% 68% 13% 12% 32% 20% 300% 50% 22% 80% 100% 67% 50% 67%
80 10/3-11/3F 33% 137% 16% 145% 15% 16% 38% 20% 225% 233% 60% 27% 80% 50% 75% 25% 41%
81 11/3-5/5F 45% 38% 14% 229% 13% 13% 32% 17% 180% 100% 22% 100% 30% 100% 38% 47% 120%
82 5/5-6/5F 56% 16% 29% 16% 16% 31% 21% 550% 114% 175% 46% 31% 44% 43% 27% 53%
83 6/5-8/5F 87% 16% 131% 18% 16% 41% 18% 233% 33% 167% 44% 43% 24% 31% 500%
84 8/5-10/6F 65% 16% 73% 14% 14% 34% 18% 450% 64% 120% 50% 40% 100% 25% 40%
85 10/6-11/6F 38% 58% 19% 84% 17% 15% 36% 19% 300% 67% 33% 133% 67% 100% 21% 35% 167%
1043 43 31% 8% 11% 11% 51% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 26% 40% 15% 11% 93% 125% 19% 15% 40% 25% 73%
1044 44 40% 9% 47% 11% 11% 76% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 88% 17% 19% 11% 15% 19% 18% 57% 51%
1045 45 12% 49% 12% 11% 30% 11% 12% 12% 11% 12% 100% 25% 11% 50% 22% 20% 78% 75%
1046 46 25% 14% 11% 20% 11% 20% 13% 12% 28% 43% 33% 12% 33% 24% 23% 47%
1047 47 56% 16% 11% 16% 11% 21% 13% 25% 100% 100% 12% 29% 33% 20% 50% 77%
1048 48 94% 47% 14% 15% 13% 13% 28% 19% 100% 27% 31% 75% 33% 71% 74% 89%
1049 49 12% 11% 11% 56% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 36% 19% 11% 50% 38% 22% 58% 53%
1050 50 36% 11% 11% 11% 59% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 67% 27% 11% 33% 23% 20% 67%
1051 51 14% 47% 12% 11% 43% 12% 13% 13% 12% 16% 38% 43% 11% 29% 40% 33% 167%
1052 52 63% 55% 14% 11% 18% 11% 18% 19% 22% 67% 33% 60% 15% 60% 67% 43% 100% 133%
1053 53 14% 11% 18% 11% 19% 15% 37% 125% 100% 100% 19% 50% 67% 40%
1054 54 33% 13% 17% 12% 13% 46% 19% 78% 100% 24% 21% 33% 27% 53%
1055 55 27% 13% 11% 11% 20% 12% 11% 11% 12% 12% 50% 19% 11% 43% 38% 26% 54% 160%
1056 56 21% 9% 11% 11% 43% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 33% 25% 11% 100% 29% 23% 77%
1057 57 43% 11% 12% 11% 29% 12% 11% 12% 12% 14% 60% 33% 11% 43% 33% 33% 67% 100% 78%
1058 58 43% 57% 14% 11% 22% 12% 13% 18% 16% 83% 43% 13% 33% 50% 33% 71%
1059 59 42% 35% 14% 11% 16% 11% 15% 12% 35% 60% 19% 67% 50% 50% 45%
1060 60 50% 13% 15% 12% 13% 33% 17% 122% 129% 78% 27% 133% 30% 100% 33% 150% 150%
Comment: Darker areas indicate higher confidence, light grey lower confidence, while
white areas are below detection limits. F, Mg and P were excluded from subsequent
PCA analysis (see also Appendix I for full details of data set).
184
Appendix G: Factor Analysis
This Appendix presents a sensitivity analysis of the PCA analysis to several of the key
assumptions and data validation steps. The information presented here is from SPSS
output reports with minimal interpretation (other than identification of probable
sources) and is generally restricted to the explanation of variance and the rotated
component matrix for each case. However, source profiles for the PCA analysis on the
final data set are compared with that from a reduced data set to show the influence of
the additional noise from lower confidence data on the solution. The key scenarios
explored are:
• Several analyses of reduced data sets beginning with the highest confidence
results and progressively adding in lower confidence results
• Analysis of the data set (with all 20 PIXE elements) including and excluding the
three outlier results
• Comparison of source profiles for final (16 element) data set and initial 20
element data set.
Case 1: Reduced number of variables (9): Na, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti and Fe
Total Variance Explained
Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared
Cpt Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings
% of Cumulati % of Cumulati % of Cumulati
Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve %
1 4.800 53.331 53.331 4.800 53.331 53.331 4.722 52.466 52.466
2 2.149 23.881 77.212 2.149 23.881 77.212 2.227 24.746 77.212
3 .812 9.021 86.233
4 .790 8.781 95.014
5 .174 1.933 96.947
6 .118 1.311 98.258
7 .081 .905 99.163
8 .058 .649 99.813
9 .017 .187 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
185
Rotated Component Matrix(a)
Component
1 2
Soil Salt/CFPS
Na .223 .594
Al .898 -.044
Si .646 .194
S -.109 .908
Cl .052 .953
K .947 .059
Ca .842 .306
Ti .974 -.057
Fe .937 .021
Comments: while these 9 elements have the highest confidence in their chemical
analysis, they provide little insight into the possible sources of the ambient aerosol as
only two sources are extracted, with a lumping together of the Salt and CFPS sources.
Case 2: Reduced number of variables (12): Na, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, Fe,
Mn, Ni, and Zn.
Total Variance Explained
Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared
Cpt Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings
% of Cumulati % of Cumulati % of Cumulati
Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve %
1 5.053 42.107 42.107 5.053 42.107 42.107 4.624 38.530 38.530
2 2.921 24.340 66.447 2.921 24.340 66.447 2.601 21.675 60.205
3 1.191 9.928 76.374 1.191 9.928 76.374 1.940 16.169 76.374
4 .855 7.129 83.504
5 .738 6.148 89.652
6 .547 4.562 94.214
7 .355 2.959 97.173
8 .123 1.025 98.197
9 .101 .838 99.036
10 .056 .463 99.499
11 .045 .378 99.876
12 .015 .124 100.000
186
Comments: the inclusion of Mn, Ni and Zn has resulted in the separation of the Salt and
CFPS components.
Case 3: Reduced number of variables (16): Na, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, Fe,
Mn, Ni, Zn, Cr, Co, Cu and Br.
Comments: inclusion of Cr, Cu, Br and Co has enabled extraction of an additional two
components; these are identified as a diesel signature and an industrial source, possibly
from metal smelting (although not associated with sulphur).
187
Case 4: PCA of Validated Set (outliers and F, P, Mg excluded)
Total Variance Explained
Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared
Cpt Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings
% of Cumulati % of Cumulati % of Cumulati
Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve %
1 6.055 30.277 30.277 6.055 30.277 30.277 4.863 24.314 24.314
2 4.558 22.792 53.068 4.558 22.792 53.068 3.465 17.323 41.637
3 1.760 8.799 61.867 1.760 8.799 61.867 2.144 10.720 52.358
4 1.530 7.652 69.520 1.530 7.652 69.520 2.131 10.656 63.014
5 1.221 6.105 75.625 1.221 6.105 75.625 1.981 9.904 72.918
6 1.135 5.675 81.300 1.135 5.675 81.300 1.677 8.383 81.300
7 .871 4.355 85.655
8 .768 3.840 89.496
9 .543 2.715 92.211
10 .473 2.364 94.574
11 .347 1.736 96.311
12 .240 1.201 97.512
13 .155 .774 98.286
14 .110 .550 98.836
15 .076 .378 99.214
16 .048 .239 99.453
17 .044 .219 99.672
18 .035 .177 99.848
19 .022 .111 99.959
20 .008 .041 100.000
Comments: sources are labelled as per Table 5-9. Essentially same source extraction as
the 5 cpt solution in body of thesis, with an extra industrial component (component 6).
Component 6 is only associated with low confidence elements Sr and Pb and is likely to
be an artefact. Reasonable explanation of variance though inferior to the 5 component
solution indicating that the addition 4 elements introduce more noise than information.
188
Case 5: PCA Analysis of Unvalidated Data Set (but excluding F, P, Mg)
Total Variance Explained
Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared
Cpt Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings
% of Cumulati % of Cumulati % of Cumulati
Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve % Total Variance ve %
1 6.046 30.230 30.230 6.046 30.230 30.230 4.807 24.036 24.036
2 4.506 22.531 52.761 4.506 22.531 52.761 2.623 13.113 37.148
3 1.917 9.586 62.347 1.917 9.586 62.347 2.240 11.201 48.350
4 1.497 7.483 69.830 1.497 7.483 69.830 2.209 11.046 59.396
5 1.164 5.819 75.649 1.164 5.819 75.649 1.912 9.559 68.954
6 1.136 5.682 81.330 1.136 5.682 81.330 1.832 9.159 78.113
7 1.002 5.010 86.340 1.002 5.010 86.340 1.645 8.227 86.340
8 .811 4.057 90.397
9 .498 2.491 92.888
10 .430 2.150 95.038
11 .296 1.478 96.516
12 .221 1.104 97.619
13 .153 .764 98.384
14 .103 .517 98.900
15 .072 .362 99.262
16 .047 .235 99.497
17 .037 .185 99.681
18 .035 .177 99.859
19 .020 .101 99.959
20 .008 .041 100.000
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Soil CFPS Diesel Salt Indust
Na .192 .199 -.110 .317 .827 .102 -.011
Al .870 -.140 .160 -.016 .086 -.096 -.083
Si .238 .040 .904 -.014 .168 -.117 .144
S -.079 .918 .181 .148 .096 .068 .126
Cl .074 .821 .068 .044 .429 .035 .163
K .930 -.045 .085 -.074 .140 .198 .150
Ca .879 .383 .012 .029 -.083 .057 .057
Ti .969 -.088 .022 -.058 .063 .122 -.018
V .564 -.023 -.135 .068 .017 .608 .142
Cr -.061 .566 .529 .502 -.024 .003 .060
Mn .216 .062 .059 -.052 .439 .794 -.037
Fe .917 -.008 .057 -.054 .084 .249 -.015
Co .032 .178 .340 .060 .831 .198 .149
Ni -.121 .511 .721 .229 .041 .197 .239
Cu .283 .199 .584 .279 -.017 .558 .050
Zn .128 .407 .044 .561 .036 .467 -.260
Br -.193 .147 .122 .841 .161 .206 -.052
Se .001 .025 .050 .796 .125 -.145 .173
Sr .095 .044 .196 -.055 -.047 .038 .803
Pb -.028 .201 .036 .143 .171 -.027 .836
Comments: sources are labelled as per Table 5-9 – components 3 and 7 are new
unidentified sources; otherwise the associations are very similar. Good explanation of
variance, although large number of factors (some of which cannot readily be identified)
and concern that the obvious outlier results may force the solution.
189
Case 6: Comparison of Source Profiles for 16 and 20 Element Solutions
(a) 16 Element (5 Cpt Solution)
Component
1 2 3 4 5
Interpretation soil coal salt diesel indust1
-3
Avg Mass (ng m ) 453.4 130.1 157.7 51.5 -3.0
Mass % 56.6% 16.2% 19.7% 6.4% -0.4%
Cum % Mass 56.6% 72.9% 92.6% 99.0% 98.6%
Na 5.7% 2.3% 48.0% 46.3% 2.4%
Al 9.9% -2.3% 1.1% 3.8% 4.3%
Si 66.8% 23.8% 9.5% 27.6% 104.0%
S -0.9% 49.5% 17.4% 16.1% 12.9%
Cl 1.8% 21.1% 19.5% -5.7% 1.7%
K 3.0% -0.2% 0.8% -1.1% -3.4%
Ca 2.7% 1.3% 0.1% -0.1% -0.6%
Ti 1.2% -0.3% 0.1% -0.3% -1.0%
Cr 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 1.0% -0.1%
Mn 0.3% 0.0% 1.0% 0.8% -3.0%
Fe 9.7% -1.0% 1.4% -0.6% -13.2%
Co 0.0% 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% -0.5%
Ni -0.1% 3.6% 0.1% 2.8% -2.3%
Cu 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% -0.5%
Zn 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 2.4% -0.3%
Br -0.3% 0.6% 0.5% 6.4% -0.3%
Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6
Interpretation soil coal indust1 salt diesel indust2
-3
Avg Mass (ng m ) 470.2 134.5 -17.0 157.1 20.9 -1.0
% Mass 58.5% 16.7% -2.1% 19.6% 2.6% -0.1%
Cum % Mass 58.5% 75.3% 73.2% 92.7% 95.3% 95.2%
Na 6.1% 2.5% -10.5% 47.5% 99.4% 118.4%
Al 9.8% -1.7% 0.8% 0.8% 2.4% 39.3%
Si 67.8% 27.8% 137.4% 10.5% -18.4% 626.5%
S -0.9% 46.7% 14.1% 17.4% 9.0% -246.9%
Cl 1.7% 18.7% 3.0% 19.1% -11.0% -237.7%
K 2.8% -0.3% -6.3% 0.7% -2.0% -50.3%
Ca 2.6% 1.2% -2.5% 0.1% -1.1% -15.7%
Ti 1.2% -0.3% -2.1% 0.1% -0.6% -2.6%
V 0.0% 0.0% -0.2% 0.0% 0.0% -0.3%
Cr 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% -5.5%
Mn 0.2% 0.2% -5.0% 1.0% -0.7% 11.6%
Fe 9.0% -0.7% -23.2% 1.3% -5.8% -16.4%
Co 0.0% 0.1% -0.5% 0.5% 0.3% -6.9%
Ni -0.2% 3.3% -2.4% 0.1% 5.6% -65.6%
Cu 0.1% 0.2% -0.8% 0.0% 0.7% -1.4%
Zn 0.1% 0.4% -1.1% 0.2% 3.2% 20.2%
Br -0.3% 0.7% -0.8% 0.5% 13.8% 16.2%
Se 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 1.7% -3.4%
Sr 0.1% 0.1% -0.1% 0.0% -0.2% -43.9%
Pb 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.7% -36.3%
Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99%
Comments: the main differences between these two solutions lies in the composition of
the components responsible for very little of the mass, and the extra source with
somewhat nonsensical composition Indust 2 in the 6 component solution. It is thought
190
that this may be due to additional noise introduced into the data set by the inclusion of
data with higher uncertainties. The composition of the main sources remains very
similar in both cases.
191
Appendix H: t-Tests
Overall data – all stages – high versus low SO2
Variances
assumed to be Lower Upper
Na Equal .111 .739 .031 94.00 .975 1.34 43.01 -84.05 86.73
Not Equal .031 93.51 .975 1.34 43.01 -84.05 86.73
Al Equal .040 .842 .423 93.00 .674 6.12 14.47 -22.62 34.85
Not Equal .423 92.66 .673 6.12 14.46 -22.60 34.83
Si Equal 9.994 .002 2.096 92.00 .039 251.97 120.22 13.21 490.72
Not Equal 2.063 57.71 .044 251.97 122.14 7.45 496.49
S Equal 12.845 .001 2.098 94.00 .039 102.18 48.70 5.48 198.87
Not Equal 2.098 50.76 .041 102.18 48.70 4.39 199.96
Cl Equal 6.936 .010 1.420 94.00 .159 36.52 25.72 -14.55 87.59
Not Equal 1.420 58.28 .161 36.52 25.72 -14.96 88.01
K Equal 2.199 .141 .046 94.00 .964 .20 4.41 -8.55 8.96
Not Equal .046 80.73 .964 .20 4.41 -8.57 8.98
Ca Equal .442 .508 .865 94.00 .389 3.55 4.11 -4.60 11.70
Not Equal .865 93.87 .389 3.55 4.11 -4.60 11.70
Ti Equal .614 .435 -.018 94.00 .986 -.03 1.72 -3.45 3.39
Not Equal -.018 82.41 .986 -.03 1.72 -3.46 3.40
V Equal 6.148 .015 -1.744 94.00 .084 -.12 .07 -.27 .02
Not Equal -1.744 66.72 .086 -.12 .07 -.27 .02
Cr Equal 5.551 .021 1.284 94.00 .202 1.10 .86 -.60 2.81
Not Equal 1.284 73.87 .203 1.10 .86 -.61 2.81
Mn Equal 3.740 .056 -1.007 94.00 .317 -1.74 1.73 -5.17 1.69
Not Equal -1.007 62.19 .318 -1.74 1.73 -5.19 1.71
Fe Equal 3.739 .056 -.904 94.00 .369 -12.96 14.34 -41.43 15.51
Not Equal -.904 74.46 .369 -12.96 14.34 -41.53 15.61
Co Equal .872 .353 .337 94.00 .737 .17 .51 -.84 1.18
Not Equal .337 78.63 .737 .17 .51 -.84 1.18
Ni Equal 5.015 .027 .979 94.00 .330 3.63 3.71 -3.74 11.01
Not Equal .979 52.16 .332 3.63 3.71 -3.81 11.08
Cu Equal .057 .812 -.035 94.00 .972 -.01 .35 -.72 .69
Not Equal -.035 91.91 .972 -.01 .35 -.72 .69
Zn Equal 3.936 .050 -1.279 94.00 .204 -1.12 .88 -2.86 .62
Not Equal -1.279 93.89 .204 -1.12 .88 -2.86 .62
Br Equal 6.600 .012 -1.193 94.00 .236 -2.66 2.23 -7.08 1.77
Not Equal -1.193 73.14 .237 -2.66 2.23 -7.10 1.78
Se Equal .134 .716 .247 94.00 .806 .07 .28 -.49 .63
Not Equal .247 93.13 .806 .07 .28 -.49 .63
Sr Equal 1.684 .198 -.750 94.00 .455 -.67 .89 -2.44 1.10
Not Equal -.750 59.04 .456 -.67 .89 -2.45 1.12
Pb Equal 1.785 .185 .616 94.00 .540 .44 .72 -.99 1.88
Not Equal .616 78.66 .540 .44 .72 -.99 1.88
Mass Equal 8.374 .005 2.032 94.00 .045 382.58 188.30 8.71 756.45
Not Equal 2.032 71.00 .046 382.58 188.30 7.12 758.03
192
Stage by stage comparison of high versus low SO2 samples
193
S Levene's Test
t for Equality of
g Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. Std.
(2- Mean Error 95% Confidence
taile Differen Differe Interval of the
F Sig. t df d) ce nce Difference
Variances
assumed to be Lower Upper
Not Equal -1.298 14.00 .215 -.09 .07 -.24 .06
Cr Equal 2.126 .167 -.329 14.00 .747 -.06 .20 -.49 .36
Not Equal -.329 8.67 .750 -.06 .20 -.51 .38
Mn Equal .145 .709 .481 14.00 .638 .24 .50 -.83 1.30
Not Equal .481 13.79 .638 .24 .50 -.83 1.30
Fe Equal 2.328 .149 .380 14.00 .710 11.13 29.32 -51.75 74.01
Not Equal .380 13.53 .710 11.13 29.32 -51.96 74.21
Co Equal .531 .478 .012 14.00 .991 .00 .35 -.74 .75
Not Equal .012 13.91 .991 .00 .35 -.74 .75
Ni Equal 17.738 .001 -2.205 14.00 .045 -1.63 .74 -3.22 -.04
Not Equal -2.205 7.49 .061 -1.63 .74 -3.36 .10
Cu Equal .003 .954 .532 14.00 .603 .20 .37 -.60 1.00
Not Equal .532 13.67 .603 .20 .37 -.60 1.00
Zn Equal .017 .897 .362 14.00 .723 .18 .50 -.90 1.27
Not Equal .362 13.45 .723 .18 .50 -.90 1.27
Br Equal 2.426 .142 -.152 14.00 .881 -.03 .22 -.49 .43
Not Equal -.152 10.08 .882 -.03 .22 -.51 .45
Se Equal .396 .539 .319 14.00 .754 .01 .04 -.07 .10
Not Equal .319 12.50 .755 .01 .04 -.07 .10
Sr Equal .292 .597 .104 14.00 .918 .03 .26 -.52 .58
Not Equal .104 13.02 .918 .03 .26 -.53 .58
Pb Equal .674 .426 .894 14.00 .386 .11 .13 -.16 .38
Not Equal .894 12.47 .388 .11 .13 -.16 .39
Mass Equal 3.778 .072 1.137 14.00 .275 650.20 571.91 -576.43 1876.83
Not Equal 1.137 7.87 .289 650.20 571.91 -672.36 1972.76
3 Na Equal .146 .708 1.037 14.00 .317 29.50 28.45 -31.52 90.52
Not Equal 1.037 13.83 .318 29.50 28.45 -31.59 90.59
Al Equal 2.810 .116 1.256 14.00 .230 17.44 13.89 -12.35 47.23
Not Equal 1.256 9.62 .239 17.44 13.89 -13.68 48.56
Si Equal 4.137 .061 1.192 14.00 .253 339.83 285.06 -271.56 951.21
Not Equal 1.192 8.02 .267 339.83 285.06 -317.19 996.85
S Equal .054 .820 .055 14.00 .957 .41 7.41 -15.48 16.30
Not Equal .055 12.60 .957 .41 7.41 -15.65 16.47
Cl Equal 2.867 .113 -.667 14.00 .515 -10.46 15.68 -44.09 23.17
Not Equal -.667 8.35 .523 -10.46 15.68 -46.36 25.43
K Equal .081 .780 .909 14.00 .379 1.97 2.17 -2.68 6.63
Not Equal .909 13.55 .379 1.97 2.17 -2.70 6.64
Ca Equal .445 .515 1.097 14.00 .291 2.78 2.54 -2.66 8.22
Not Equal 1.097 13.76 .291 2.78 2.54 -2.67 8.23
Ti Equal .134 .720 .742 14.00 .470 .68 .91 -1.28 2.63
Not Equal .742 13.83 .470 .68 .91 -1.28 2.63
V Equal .011 .918 -.136 14.00 .894 -.01 .06 -.14 .12
Not Equal -.136 13.56 .894 -.01 .06 -.14 .12
Cr Equal 1.519 .238 1.125 14.00 .279 .06 .05 -.06 .18
Not Equal 1.125 9.61 .288 .06 .05 -.06 .18
Mn Equal .236 .635 -1.210 14.00 .246 -.16 .13 -.44 .12
Not Equal -1.210 13.77 .247 -.16 .13 -.45 .12
Fe Equal 6.391 .024 -1.196 14.00 .252 -12.12 10.14 -33.86 9.62
Not Equal -1.196 10.50 .258 -12.12 10.14 -34.56 10.32
Co Equal .147 .708 -1.338 14.00 .202 -.14 .11 -.37 .08
Not Equal -1.338 13.57 .203 -.14 .11 -.37 .09
Ni Equal 2.553 .132 -1.095 14.00 .292 -.61 .56 -1.81 .59
Not Equal -1.095 8.59 .303 -.61 .56 -1.89 .66
Cu Equal 2.365 .146 -1.027 14.00 .322 -.14 .14 -.44 .16
Not Equal -1.027 10.98 .326 -.14 .14 -.45 .16
Zn Equal 1.274 .278 -.680 14.00 .508 -.12 .17 -.49 .25
Not Equal -.680 12.92 .508 -.12 .17 -.49 .26
Br Equal .097 .760 .054 14.00 .957 .01 .25 -.51 .54
Not Equal .054 13.13 .957 .01 .25 -.52 .54
Se Equal 3.962 .066 .793 14.00 .441 .02 .02 -.03 .07
Not Equal .793 8.21 .450 .02 .02 -.04 .07
Sr Equal .261 .617 .120 14.00 .906 .02 .17 -.33 .37
Not Equal .120 12.95 .906 .02 .17 -.34 .38
Pb Equal .556 .468 -.363 14.00 .722 -.02 .07 -.17 .12
Not Equal -.363 12.56 .723 -.02 .07 -.17 .12
Mass Equal 4.381 .055 1.134 14.00 .276 368.93 325.35 -328.88 1066.74
194
S Levene's Test
t for Equality of
g Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. Std.
(2- Mean Error 95% Confidence
taile Differen Differe Interval of the
F Sig. t df d) ce nce Difference
Variances
assumed to be Lower Upper
Not Equal 1.134 8.09 .289 368.93 325.35 -379.81 1117.67
4 Na Equal 1.329 .268 .645 14.00 .529 5.95 9.23 -13.84 25.74
Not Equal .645 10.42 .533 5.95 9.23 -14.50 26.40
Al Equal 4.021 .065 .938 14.00 .364 5.71 6.09 -7.35 18.77
Not Equal .938 8.76 .374 5.71 6.09 -8.12 19.55
Si Equal 4.126 .062 .984 14.00 .342 207.07 210.33 -244.05 658.19
Not Equal .984 7.95 .354 207.07 210.33 -278.48 692.62
S Equal .806 .385 .742 14.00 .470 12.41 16.73 -23.46 48.28
Not Equal .742 12.28 .472 12.41 16.73 -23.94 48.76
Cl Equal 1.474 .245 -.330 14.00 .747 -.64 1.95 -4.81 3.53
Not Equal -.330 11.85 .748 -.64 1.95 -4.89 3.60
K Equal .558 .467 .331 14.00 .746 .24 .72 -1.30 1.77
Not Equal .331 13.30 .746 .24 .72 -1.31 1.78
Ca Equal .109 .747 .322 14.00 .752 .25 .76 -1.39 1.88
Not Equal .322 12.05 .753 .25 .76 -1.42 1.91
Ti Equal .519 .483 -.393 14.00 .700 -.06 .15 -.38 .26
Not Equal -.393 13.55 .700 -.06 .15 -.38 .26
V Equal 8.347 .012 -1.060 14.00 .307 -.05 .05 -.15 .05
Not Equal -1.060 9.16 .316 -.05 .05 -.16 .06
Cr Equal 2.851 .113 1.228 14.00 .240 .14 .12 -.11 .39
Not Equal 1.228 7.86 .255 .14 .12 -.13 .41
Mn Equal 4.427 .054 -.506 14.00 .620 -.02 .04 -.12 .07
Not Equal -.506 11.42 .622 -.02 .04 -.12 .07
Fe Equal .302 .591 -1.560 14.00 .141 -3.22 2.06 -7.64 1.20
Not Equal -1.560 13.98 .141 -3.22 2.06 -7.64 1.21
Co Equal 3.334 .089 -.937 14.00 .365 -.03 .03 -.10 .04
Not Equal -.937 10.68 .370 -.03 .03 -.10 .04
Ni Equal .619 .445 -.390 14.00 .702 -.21 .54 -1.36 .94
Not Equal -.390 10.89 .704 -.21 .54 -1.39 .97
Cu Equal 6.216 .026 -1.759 14.00 .100 -.15 .08 -.32 .03
Not Equal -1.759 8.09 .116 -.15 .08 -.34 .04
Zn Equal .076 .787 -.028 14.00 .978 .00 .13 -.28 .27
Not Equal -.028 13.85 .978 .00 .13 -.28 .27
Br Equal .241 .631 .120 14.00 .906 .02 .16 -.33 .37
Not Equal .120 13.79 .906 .02 .16 -.33 .37
Se Equal 2.744 .120 .793 14.00 .441 .04 .05 -.07 .16
Not Equal .793 8.75 .449 .04 .05 -.08 .17
Sr Equal 2.624 .128 .831 14.00 .420 .03 .04 -.05 .11
Not Equal .831 8.73 .428 .03 .04 -.05 .11
Pb Equal 2.814 .116 -.995 14.00 .337 -.07 .07 -.22 .08
Not Equal -.995 8.03 .349 -.07 .07 -.23 .09
Mass Equal 4.286 .057 .998 14.00 .335 227.42 227.89 -261.36 716.19
Not Equal .998 7.79 .348 227.42 227.89 -300.62 755.45
5 Na Equal 5.737 .031 1.399 14.00 .184 4.21 3.01 -2.25 10.67
Not Equal 1.399 9.61 .193 4.21 3.01 -2.53 10.96
Al Equal .068 .799 -.253 13.00 .804 -.77 3.06 -7.38 5.83
Not Equal -.252 12.32 .805 -.77 3.08 -7.46 5.91
Si Equal .310 .587 -.210 13.00 .837 -24.49 116.37 -275.91 226.92
Not Equal -.211 12.79 .836 -24.49 116.24 -276.03 227.04
S Equal 4.715 .048 2.391 14.00 .031 74.92 31.34 7.72 142.13
Not Equal 2.391 7.96 .044 74.92 31.34 2.60 147.25
Cl Equal 4.690 .048 -1.053 14.00 .310 -1.21 1.15 -3.68 1.26
Not Equal -1.053 10.30 .316 -1.21 1.15 -3.76 1.34
K Equal 1.360 .263 1.453 14.00 .168 2.15 1.48 -1.02 5.32
Not Equal 1.453 13.43 .169 2.15 1.48 -1.03 5.33
Ca Equal .510 .487 .789 14.00 .443 .21 .27 -.37 .79
Not Equal .789 11.27 .446 .21 .27 -.38 .81
Ti Equal 2.664 .125 -.825 14.00 .423 -.06 .07 -.21 .10
Not Equal -.825 9.69 .429 -.06 .07 -.22 .10
V Equal 1.250 .282 -.883 14.00 .392 -.03 .04 -.11 .05
Not Equal -.883 10.48 .397 -.03 .04 -.12 .05
Cr Equal .519 .483 .068 14.00 .947 .00 .05 -.10 .11
Not Equal .068 12.10 .947 .00 .05 -.10 .11
Mn Equal .298 .594 -.088 14.00 .931 .00 .03 -.08 .07
Not Equal -.088 13.71 .931 .00 .03 -.08 .07
Fe Equal 14.972 .002 -2.746 14.00 .016 -2.72 .99 -4.84 -.59
195
S Levene's Test
t for Equality of
g Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. Std.
(2- Mean Error 95% Confidence
taile Differen Differe Interval of the
F Sig. t df d) ce nce Difference
Variances
assumed to be Lower Upper
Not Equal -2.746 8.15 .025 -2.72 .99 -4.99 -.44
Co Equal .798 .387 -1.712 14.00 .109 -.07 .04 -.15 .02
Not Equal -1.712 13.56 .110 -.07 .04 -.15 .02
Ni Equal 6.044 .028 -1.244 14.00 .234 -.74 .59 -2.02 .54
Not Equal -1.244 7.05 .253 -.74 .59 -2.14 .66
Cu Equal .088 .772 -2.192 14.00 .046 -.06 .03 -.13 .00
Not Equal -2.192 13.14 .047 -.06 .03 -.13 .00
Zn Equal .709 .414 -.834 14.00 .418 -.11 .13 -.38 .17
Not Equal -.834 12.65 .420 -.11 .13 -.39 .17
Br Equal .008 .930 -.369 14.00 .717 -.08 .23 -.58 .41
Not Equal -.369 13.36 .718 -.08 .23 -.58 .41
Se Equal 2.990 .106 1.613 14.00 .129 .07 .04 -.02 .15
Not Equal 1.613 7.72 .147 .07 .04 -.03 .16
Sr Equal .853 .371 -.440 14.00 .667 -.01 .03 -.07 .04
Not Equal -.440 10.28 .669 -.01 .03 -.07 .05
Pb Equal 5.147 .040 .469 14.00 .646 .08 .18 -.30 .46
Not Equal .469 10.87 .648 .08 .18 -.31 .47
Mass Equal .479 .500 .670 14.00 .513 86.08 128.40 -189.30 361.46
Not Equal .670 13.35 .514 86.08 128.40 -190.57 362.73
F Na Equal .271 .611 .026 14.00 .980 5.31 202.90 -429.88 440.49
Not Equal .026 13.85 .980 5.31 202.90 -430.31 440.93
Al Equal 4.776 .046 -.937 14.00 .365 -7.83 8.36 -25.76 10.10
Not Equal -.937 7.05 .380 -7.83 8.36 -27.57 11.91
Si Equal 10.021 .007 2.037 13.00 .063 319.59 156.87 -19.31 658.49
Not Equal 1.903 6.32 .103 319.59 167.91 -86.32 725.50
S Equal 5.849 .030 2.559 14.00 .023 529.42 206.89 85.68 973.15
Not Equal 2.559 7.51 .035 529.42 206.89 46.87 1011.97
Cl Equal 7.601 .015 3.092 14.00 .008 299.54 96.89 91.74 507.35
Not Equal 3.092 7.99 .015 299.54 96.89 76.09 523.00
K Equal 2.731 .121 .723 14.00 .481 4.76 6.57 -9.35 18.86
Not Equal .723 11.32 .484 4.76 6.57 -9.66 19.18
Ca Equal 9.999 .007 1.467 14.00 .164 17.79 12.12 -8.21 43.79
Not Equal 1.467 7.56 .183 17.79 12.12 -10.45 46.03
Ti Equal 5.444 .035 1.000 14.00 .334 .79 .79 -.91 2.49
Not Equal 1.000 7.00 .351 .79 .79 -1.08 2.66
V Equal .337 .571 -.249 14.00 .807 -.07 .28 -.66 .52
Not Equal -.249 12.50 .808 -.07 .28 -.67 .53
Cr Equal .629 .441 1.612 14.00 .129 6.52 4.05 -2.16 15.20
Not Equal 1.612 12.74 .132 6.52 4.05 -2.24 15.28
Mn Equal .799 .386 -.260 14.00 .799 -1.50 5.77 -13.87 10.88
Not Equal -.260 13.55 .799 -1.50 5.77 -13.91 10.91
Fe Equal 1.649 .220 1.424 14.00 .176 12.34 8.67 -6.25 30.94
Not Equal 1.424 9.95 .185 12.34 8.67 -6.99 31.68
Co Equal 3.100 .100 .908 14.00 .379 2.29 2.53 -3.13 7.72
Not Equal .908 10.96 .384 2.29 2.53 -3.27 7.86
Ni Equal 12.340 .003 1.438 14.00 .172 26.50 18.43 -13.03 66.03
Not Equal 1.438 7.28 .192 26.50 18.43 -16.74 69.74
Cu Equal 4.129 .062 .689 14.00 .502 1.17 1.70 -2.47 4.82
Not Equal .689 12.26 .503 1.17 1.70 -2.52 4.86
Zn Equal 3.694 .075 -1.086 14.00 .296 -4.21 3.88 -12.52 4.11
Not Equal -1.086 10.79 .301 -4.21 3.88 -12.76 4.34
Br Equal 1.047 .323 -2.064 14.00 .058 -15.79 7.65 -32.20 .62
Not Equal -2.064 12.49 .060 -15.79 7.65 -32.39 .81
Se Equal .015 .905 .246 14.00 .809 .39 1.60 -3.04 3.83
Not Equal .246 13.57 .809 .39 1.60 -3.05 3.84
Sr Equal 2.068 .172 -.640 14.00 .533 -3.37 5.27 -14.67 7.93
Not Equal -.640 8.66 .539 -3.37 5.27 -15.36 8.62
Pb Equal 2.240 .157 .846 14.00 .412 3.20 3.78 -4.91 11.30
Not Equal .846 10.60 .414 3.20 3.78 -5.02 11.42
Mass Equal 7.491 .016 2.347 14.00 .034 1187.60 505.93 102.48 2272.72
Not Equal 2.347 11.98 .044 1187.60 505.93 40.82 2334.38
196
Appendix I: Quantitative Source Assessment
This Appendix explains the extension of the PCA analysis using the methodology of
Thurston and Spengler (1985) to generate firstly estimated source contributions to the
observed mass and secondly the derivation of the source profiles themselves. The data
reported here is taken from an excel spreadsheet, with comments appended in line with
the steps outlined in the explanatory example presented in Appendix A of the
aforementioned paper (Thurston and Spengler, 1985). This analysis is intended to be
read in conjunction with the paper rather than to fully explain the procedure.
197
Table I-1: Data used in calculation of PCS*0 scores.
SPSS - Std Score coefficients
Element Mean SD -mean/sd FA1 FA2 FA3 FA4 FA5 FA6
Na 133.95 209.57 -0.639 0.0338 -0.1558 -0.1384 0.4979 0.1307 -0.0598
Al 34.05 69.89 -0.487 0.2496 -0.0491 -0.1853 0.0201 0.0875 -0.0336
Si 365.86 588.57 -0.622 0.2585 0.1123 -0.3526 0.0387 -0.0068 -0.1064
S 99.96 242.82 -0.412 0.0044 0.3317 -0.1078 0.0595 -0.1900 -0.0695
Cl 63.20 126.68 -0.499 0.0114 0.2103 -0.1289 0.2704 -0.2169 -0.0208
K 17.14 21.49 -0.798 0.1530 -0.0634 0.0786 0.0053 0.0001 0.1097
Ca 14.54 20.08 -0.724 0.1955 0.1140 -0.0576 -0.0723 -0.0426 -0.0089
Ti 5.09 8.40 -0.606 0.1798 -0.0655 0.0403 -0.0212 0.0284 0.0188
V 0.17 0.35 -0.492 -0.0103 -0.0757 0.3635 -0.0633 0.0234 0.0581
Cr 1.28 4.22 -0.305 0.0255 0.2332 -0.0528 -0.1458 0.1350 -0.0044
Mn 2.48 8.47 -0.293 -0.1116 -0.0050 0.4013 0.1689 -0.1528 -0.0936
Fe 49.40 70.18 -0.704 0.1425 -0.0266 0.1163 -0.0265 -0.0135 0.0038
Co 1.08 2.48 -0.436 -0.0678 -0.0485 0.0644 0.3856 -0.0618 0.0862
Ni 5.25 18.18 -0.289 -0.0388 0.2774 0.0877 -0.1447 -0.0499 0.0941
Cu 0.86 1.73 -0.498 -0.0161 0.1603 0.3115 -0.2241 0.0476 0.0021
Zn 2.17 4.31 -0.504 0.0107 0.1143 0.1040 -0.0321 0.1745 -0.2694
Br 4.38 10.94 -0.400 -0.0167 -0.0627 -0.0019 0.0079 0.4511 -0.0666
Se 0.33 1.37 -0.239 0.0431 -0.1730 -0.0970 -0.0180 0.5272 0.1579
Sr 0.90 4.36 -0.205 0.0102 -0.0184 0.0208 -0.0863 -0.0029 0.4881
Pb 1.11 3.53 -0.315 -0.0206 -0.0804 -0.0298 0.0685 0.0825 0.4950
Calculation of the Absolute Principal Component Scores (APCS) for each observation
is straightforward being the subtraction of the (negative) absolute zero scores for each
element from the principal component scores from Step 1:
APCSχk* *
= PCχk - PCχo
*
The low value of the constant (38.45) indicates that the regression describes the
variation in the data quite well, although it is interesting to note that the coefficient for
the indust1 component is negative. Table I-2 shows the predicted masses for all 96
observations, along with the model and some summary statistics. This data is plotted in
the body of the thesis in Figure 5-16.
198
Table I-2: Regression output for estimated component mass concentrations.
Regression on mass (total) Total mass average
Intercept 38.45 Intercept small relative to total mass 803.21
Notes:
Coeff S1 662.21 soil
Coeff S2 456.64 coal Intercept (unexplained mass)
Coeff S3 -127.73 indust1
Coeff S4 386.03 salt
Coeff S5 64.92 diesel Predicted Actual relatively small, major mass
Coeff S6 -7.79 indust2
SO2 Stg ES1 ES2 ES3 ES4 ES5 ES6 sum ES Mass components have large positive
H 1 2,594.7 138.0 249.9 220.0 31.7 0.0 3,234.3 3,589.17
H
H
2
3
3,181.6
1,293.2
272.3
154.2
292.8
204.6
257.4
216.0
44.0
16.4
7.0
4.1
4,055.1
1,888.5
5,063.82
2,793.81
coefficients.
H 4 672.5 214.8 149.5 61.4 13.4 2.8 1,114.6 1,903.76
H 5 147.2 222.2 30.2 28.6 -14.5 1.0 414.6 595.27
H 6 973.6 3,816.3 49.4 -283.5 -16.1 16.6 4,556.2 4,289.30
H 1 1,181.0 21.5 85.5 112.8 13.8 1.1 1,415.6 1,293.69
H 2 1,349.2 60.2 105.8 193.8 13.8 0.8 1,723.6 1,796.10
H 3 616.2 30.9 77.0 136.4 11.7 0.4 872.6 1,123.43
H 4 263.9 60.5 55.2 34.2 2.7 1.1 417.7 690.90
H 5 265.8 102.1 55.9 47.9 -0.7 1.0 472.1 782.53
H 6 846.7 570.6 75.9 761.1 97.8 -20.8 2,331.2 2,423.24
H 1 638.8 -3.7 -30.2 70.7 4.5 -0.9 679.3 586.32
H 2 452.9 -0.6 11.9 120.8 5.2 -0.9 589.3 496.72
H 3 123.9 2.1 -2.6 73.1 6.0 0.2 202.8 289.59
H 4 44.1 15.0 4.9 11.9 1.2 0.1 77.3 134.71
H 5 47.4 34.2 -1.2 22.2 1.8 0.0 104.4 164.79
H 6 -36.5 1,990.6 -212.6 48.1 83.4 -32.9 1,840.1 1,969.18
H 1 959.3 -34.2 -100.7 198.2 19.6 -3.0 1,039.2 861.94
H 2 478.1 -16.7 -66.1 93.7 6.4 -1.1 494.3 430.99
H 3 147.9 8.6 -8.0 50.9 -0.6 -0.3 198.5 165.36
H 4 59.7 -9.2 1.2 69.2 4.3 0.1 125.3 132.69
H 5 49.5 20.0 -9.3 15.1 2.0 -0.4 76.9 110.08
H 6 74.7 161.6 35.0 403.7 2.1 -4.6 672.4 663.24
H 1 859.8 -15.9 -44.9 135.6 2.8 -1.4 936.0 705.21
H 2 782.4 -87.1 -77.2 154.1 9.5 -2.7 779.0 658.61
H 3 269.1 -23.9 -36.1 66.5 6.8 -0.6 281.9 340.89
H 4 19.2 12.9 -8.8 10.1 -0.3 0.0 33.0 89.03 Note some estimated “masses” are
H 5 25.4 38.4 -11.9 4.3 -0.1 0.1 56.2 136.46
H
H
6
1
333.3
433.0
609.9
13.2
-14.8
-25.1
-99.9
95.9
260.9
-0.4
-2.5
-0.3
1,086.9
516.2
1,245.79
440.00
negative, some quite significantly so
H 2 793.2 12.3 -10.7 304.6 -1.0 -0.4 1,098.1 897.10
H 3 282.8 -2.6 -8.7 135.4 4.4 0.1 411.5 546.90 (especially E3, the Indust1
H 4 40.3 2.2 -13.1 15.2 1.8 -0.3 46.1 100.09
H
H
5
6
59.0
-28.2
75.9
735.9
-4.4
55.6
17.1
3,039.2
-2.9
-156.0
-0.8
3.9
143.9
3,650.5
174.96
3,715.33
component). This is a reflection of
H 1 1,344.3 24.1 -108.3 30.0 10.2 -2.2 1,298.0 992.41
H 2 1,328.5 79.7 -60.2 17.5 4.7 -2.0 1,368.2 998.99 noise in the data and a consequence
H 3 328.8 27.8 -7.2 28.3 1.6 -0.3 379.0 313.00
H
H
4
5
134.8
29.7
65.2
84.7
9.3
8.5
1.1
17.0
-0.3
5.8
0.4
-0.8
210.5
144.9
274.29
197.44
of regression finding a best fit to the
H 6 123.3 149.5 110.6 1,091.4 46.4 -24.4 1,496.8 1,523.53
H 1 581.2 43.9 -7.9 65.1 0.6 -0.1 682.8 456.60 data without the constraints of a
H 2 554.5 71.1 -0.4 92.6 0.0 -0.6 717.3 418.32
H 3 310.5 51.2 2.0 25.9 1.7 0.3 391.5 271.95
H 4 47.9 50.1 -4.7 -0.7 1.4 0.0 94.0 132.93
physical reality.
H 5 21.4 35.9 -2.2 8.7 0.9 -0.9 63.9 106.39
H 6 97.2 706.9 -2.9 181.8 118.5 11.1 1,112.7 790.68
L 1 3,661.1 -221.9 -155.3 100.6 58.2 -7.4 3,435.3 3,260.19
L 2 1,343.7 99.4 0.4 11.8 19.8 -0.3 1,474.8 1,551.07
L 3 627.1 77.5 26.9 17.4 8.8 0.8 758.4 924.90
L 4 245.2 71.4 22.2 -4.1 4.9 0.9 340.5 509.87
L 5 208.6 78.3 37.5 12.5 1.4 0.4 338.7 577.72
L 6 360.2 319.2 31.4 30.9 -29.8 -52.3 659.5 1,064.34
L 1 900.5 -51.2 -14.8 70.0 10.7 -1.2 914.1 827.52
L 2 274.6 21.3 6.1 76.6 -0.1 -0.1 378.4 362.31
L 3 226.1 1.0 -20.0 107.3 3.2 -0.1 317.5 278.64
L 4 71.9 -4.8 -2.2 28.5 4.6 -0.2 97.7 89.60
L 5 55.0 26.4 -22.1 -0.5 4.6 -0.1 63.2 110.68
L 6 43.7 188.2 -11.0 12.7 111.7 6.4 351.8 403.04
L 1 509.5 92.0 7.1 308.1 -4.8 -0.9 911.1 656.70
L 2 333.8 77.3 -4.7 275.4 -7.1 0.1 674.7 522.84
L 3 170.1 69.4 17.9 238.0 -4.9 0.2 490.7 401.34
L 4 51.8 6.9 -4.2 32.2 1.9 -0.1 88.6 92.12
L 5 219.9 18.3 -1.2 5.3 3.8 0.2 246.3 583.48
L 6 10.5 -56.2 -10.1 230.7 134.2 -8.5 300.6 318.28
L 1 1,167.5 -5.6 -38.8 189.1 3.0 -2.7 1,312.5 927.63
L 2 1,057.5 -64.2 -62.2 163.9 4.5 -1.9 1,097.7 768.95
L 3 336.3 -37.2 -23.5 117.6 4.1 -0.4 396.9 367.46
L 4 27.9 27.9 -0.2 38.8 -1.5 0.1 93.0 112.96
L 5 19.8 43.8 1.9 11.5 -2.8 0.1 74.3 88.24
L 6 80.5 576.3 2.3 272.4 99.4 6.3 1,037.3 760.50
L 1 343.4 56.9 17.4 151.0 -1.4 0.1 567.4 587.60
L 2 384.0 63.9 5.7 150.4 1.2 -0.5 604.7 758.51
L 3 149.7 49.9 -1.7 19.9 0.4 0.1 218.2 343.45
L 4 100.4 31.3 -24.5 -17.9 4.3 -0.1 93.5 326.14
L 5 9.4 49.9 -8.1 -0.7 -0.1 -0.7 49.6 78.11
L
L
6
1
-43.4
731.6
-191.3
87.9
-88.6
-24.5
1,838.7
332.2
157.3
-5.3
12.3
-1.4
1,685.1
1,120.6
1,705.63
938.63
Explanation of total mass is good
L 2 102.2 6.9 -59.7 -9.2 3.0 -0.7 42.5 268.05
L 3 16.1 4.1 -11.4 4.6 0.6 0.0 13.9 75.71 over the entire data set, and generally
L 4 74.3 17.7 -2.5 -4.9 0.2 0.2 85.0 245.75
L
L
5
6
16.0
-87.5
37.3
343.2
-14.5
-592.3
3.7
320.7
1.3
91.4
0.0
8.4
43.8
83.9
81.08
1,259.02
reasonable for individual
L 1 1,616.0 98.9 -842.7 388.1 -21.8 1.1 1,239.7 1,710.25
L 2 736.8 95.9 -84.5 164.8 6.7 -1.2 918.5 739.21 observations. Note that virtually all
L 3 247.7 48.0 -23.9 30.3 1.4 -0.1 303.4 248.32
L 4 53.8 10.9 -38.7 -22.2 3.7 -0.7 6.9 117.28
L 5 30.5 34.5 -5.3 -1.1 2.8 -0.4 61.0 74.37
the mass is associated with
L 6 -48.1 255.9 -118.7 -35.0 167.7 3.0 224.8 308.58
L 1 2,289.9 -34.8 -249.3 386.2 44.8 -3.3 2,433.6 1,814.91 Components 1, 2 and 4 (soil, CFPS
L 2 699.8 37.5 -67.2 95.2 4.2 -0.1 769.4 588.09
L 3 243.2 22.8 -80.0 -6.0 3.0 -0.6 182.5 253.69
L 4 43.8 75.4 -0.4 1.9 -1.4 0.6 119.8 145.35
and salt).
L 5 9.6 64.4 -10.5 14.3 -0.3 -0.2 77.3 121.82
L 6 222.4 -300.4 123.2 528.6 450.1 -1.3 1,022.7 880.27
199
Step 4: Estimation of Source Profiles for Each Component
The component profiles are derived by regressing the elemental concentration data for
the 96 observations against the estimated masses determined above, one element at a
time. The coefficients determined from the regression are the estimated elemental
weight percentages for each element in the source profile, as shown in Table I-3. Note
that while the profiles for the major components in terms of mass are reasonable, some
of the profiles for the minor components are nonsensical. As noted previously, this is
believed to be due to amplification of noise in the underlying data set by sequential
regression analysis. This is particularly noticeable for Component 6, which was
associated with two elements with all analyses either termed “lower confidence” or
below the detection limit (c.f. Table 5-8)
200
Corrected Data Set Mean 133.95 34.05 365.86 99.96 63.20 17.14 14.54 5.09 0.17 1.28
sd 209.57 69.89 588.57 242.82 126.68 21.49 20.08 8.40 0.35 4.22
201
Corrected Data Set Mean 2.48 49.40 1.08 5.25 0.86 2.17 4.38 0.33 0.90 1.11
sd 8.47 70.18 2.48 18.18 1.73 4.31 10.94 1.37 4.36 3.53
202
Appendix J: Table of X-Ray Emission Energies (keV)