overview operations: background, current state and looking forward passive program in operation...
TRANSCRIPT
Overview
Operations: Background, Current State and Looking Forward
• Passive program in operation since August 2002
– H2S sampling introduced in 2012
• Continuous monitoring program started in 2004 with Henry Pirker, remaining stations started in 2005 and Falher trailer in 2012
Background continued and Current State
• Rover has operated at 6 locations to date
Girouxville 2007-2008
Spirit River 2008-2009
Kinuso 2009-2010
Bonanza 2010-2011
Sunset House 2011-2013
Reno 2013-2014
Clairmont (Scheduled) 2014-2015
• Current State– Network is essentially noted above:
• 6+1 continuous stations
• 44 passive locations sampling SO2/O3/NO2
• 3 passive locations sampling H2S
The Path Forward
• Network Assessment final submitted at end of October
• Next phase of project: Board support for recommendations from TC
• NA did not take regulatory, socio-political climate, etc into account
• Provides PAZA with a framework to pivot toward emerging issues, optimize monitoring resources
Suggested Recommendations (paraphrased)
• Replace passive monitoring of O3 and NO2 with passive measurements of BTEX to assess spatial and temporal patterns in speciated hydrocarbons– Consider reducing the number of SO2
passive monitoring sites and/or relocating them closer to specific facilities of interest
– Consider using passives in targeted studies of relevant pollutants near specific sites of interest, before/after studies
Suggested Recommendations (paraphrased)
• Station Relocations:– Smoky Heights west to better capture facility
emissions, or to location such as Rycroft or Clairmont
– Evergreen Park is not representative and influenced by micro-scale emissions, relocate to location such as “Countryside West” or SE of Wood Lake to capture downwind of Grande Prairie
Suggested Recommendations (paraphrased)
• Consider adding parameters to Henry Pirker and/or Rover:– BTEX to capture speciated hydrocarbons– PM10 or TSP to capture tilling/road dust– Aethlometer to capture black carbon (wood
smoke)• Standardize and modernize PM2.5 monitoring
– Phase TEOMs out, Sharp/Grimm/etc in• Determine if level of SO2 monitoring is required
to meet compliance requirements– If can be reduced, redirect resources to
BTEX, etc
Passive Program Changes
• Over 10 years of passive data across much of the network for SO2, O3, NO2
• Little temporal variance shown• Many sites very highly correlated• Many emerging issues within PAZA revolve
around speciated hydrocarbons; BTEX
Passive Correlation
Passive Correlation
• O3 table shown above• Red = High correlation
– High correlation suggests redundancy• Handful of locations show very low correlation
– Grande Prairie, Crooked Creek, Fitzsimmons• NO2, SO2 show progressively less correlation
Recommendations
Network Assessment Suitability Map 2 – Permitted Facilities Weighting
Recommendations
Network Assessment Suitability Map 1 – Base Scenario
Recommendations
Network Assessment Suitability Map 3 – Current Site Negative Bias
Network Assessment Suitability Maps
• Particular areas of note: Rycroft, Sexsmith, Clairmont, West of current Smoky Heights station
Recommendations, prioritized
• Added parameters– BTEX in the rover, *if* funding can be
secured• Station relocation
– Evergreen Park is poorly located for security as well as reasons mentioned above
– Smoky Heights also heavily influenced by very local effects, areas to the west indicated as being potentially noteworthy
Recommendations, prioritized
• Reduction of passive program, introduce BTEX– Put passives on rotating schedule (similar to
current duplicates schedule) through existing network, revisiting sites periodically to “scan” for changes.
– Explore putting passives on 60-day schedule– Introduce BTEX at strategic locations
(potential and known sites, background sites) to assess suitability for continuous monitoring
• PM monitoring– Updating to Sharp analyzers already
underway
Recommendations, prioritized
• Continuous SO2 monitoring program change– Provides comfort to all stakeholders in
current incarnation• No news?? Good News!
Challenges and Steps Forward
• Changes to monitoring network requires approval from the Director– Draft Plan, Get Approval
• Stakeholder input?– Circulate Draft, Hold Workshop?, Acquire
Input• Costs/savings need to be clarified/determined• Timeline