Air Quality In Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-benefits        Trent Wickman       US Forest Service
Why Should I Be Interested in Air Pollution?                                              Stippling andVery small amounts ...
Who are the Federal Land Managers?              (FLMs) •  USDA Forest Service –    Class I Wildernesses •  National Park S...
Tools to Address Air Quality Impacts     Wilderness Act     Clean Air Act
Wilderness Act - maintain Wilderness character and     natural conditions.     The Act defines Wilderness as follows:•    ...
Federal Clean Air Act The Federal Land Manager and the Federalofficial charged with direct responsibility formanagement of...
Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•    Acid Deposition•    Mercury Deposition•    Ozone (smog)•    Visibility So What?
Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•    Acid Deposition•    Mercury Deposition•    Ozone (smog)•    Visibility
pH5.55.45.35.2                                                 ash river5.1                                               ...
Figure 3: Sulfate Deposition During 1999* and Largest Sulfur Dioxide Point Sources**
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819841985 1986
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819851986 1987
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819861987 1988
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819871988 1989
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819881989 1990
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819891990 1991
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819901991 1992
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819911992 1993
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819921993 1994
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819931994 1995
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819941995 1996
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819951996 1997
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819961997 1998
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819971998 1999
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819981999 2000
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200819992000 2001
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820002001 2002
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820012002 2003
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820022003 2004
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820032004 2005
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820042005 2006
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820052006 2007
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820062007 2008
Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition                                    1985-200820072008 2009
Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•    Acid Deposition•    Mercury Deposition•    Ozone (smog)•    Visibility
Why is Mercury Important ?
What it s All About !
What are We Doing About It?          Monitoring                 Fernberg Station
Trend reversal•  Work done by Monson and others have   shown a recent increasing trend in mercury   in fish in the Great L...
Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•    Acid Deposition•    Mercury Deposition•    Ozone (smog)•    Visibility
Last NAAQS proposal had a REAL secondary std!
Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•    Acid Deposition•    Mercury Deposition•    Ozone (smog)•    Visibility
What Do IMPROVE Data Show ?          BWCAW, Minnesota    Clear Day             Hazy DayNatural Visibility   Degraded Visib...
What Does the Visibility Data Show        for the BWCAW?                       BWCAW profile is in                       b...
So What?What can be done about this?
Fernberg Air Monitoring Site
Where does it come from?
Contribution to 20% Worst Visibility Days at BWCAW in 2018                                   Outstate Minnesota EGU       ...
Regional Haze Glidepath            25.0                       Baseline Conditions                       20% Worst Days    ...
Regional Haze - NE Minnesota plan NE Minnesota Emission Reduction Target Year                        Total Emitted (tpy) 2...
MPCA Plan - Air sources of mercury will have a 93% emission reduction goal from 1990 levels by 2025
Change in NOx
Cross Connections•  S: highest contributor to haze and acid rain,   also enhances Hg methylation•  N: contributes to acid ...
What to Do?•  Its all about N, S, and Hg - with overlay of climate   change (CO2)•  Sources and culpability are known•  Ha...
Am I the problem or is it the industrial source               down the road?
Solution – Sustainable Living•      The agency (MPCA) recommends that more     effort be focused on education and partners...
Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits
Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits
Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits
Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits
Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits

566 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
566
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Wickman - Air Quality in Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-Benefits

  1. 1. Air Quality In Our Public Lands: Opportunities for Co-benefits Trent Wickman US Forest Service
  2. 2. Why Should I Be Interested in Air Pollution? Stippling andVery small amounts of air pollution can Necrosis affect forest health. Healthy Black Tissue Injury Cherry Leaves Visitors rank breathing fresh, clean air as a principle reason for visiting the national forests. Poor air quality and impaired visibility are an economic drag on local communities who rely upon tourism.
  3. 3. Who are the Federal Land Managers? (FLMs) •  USDA Forest Service – Class I Wildernesses •  National Park Service - Class I National Parks •  US Fish and Wildlife Service - Class I National Wildlife Refuges
  4. 4. Tools to Address Air Quality Impacts Wilderness Act Clean Air Act
  5. 5. Wilderness Act - maintain Wilderness character and natural conditions. The Act defines Wilderness as follows:•  "...lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition..." Section 2(a)•  "...an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man..." Section 2(c)•  "...an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvement or human habitation..." Section 2(c)•  "...generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of mans work substantially unnoticeable..." Section 2(c)•  "...has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation..." Section 2(c)•  "...shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreation, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation and historic use." Section 4(b)
  6. 6. Federal Clean Air Act The Federal Land Manager and the Federalofficial charged with direct responsibility formanagement of such lands shall have anaffirmative responsibility to protect the airquality related values (including visibility) of anysuch lands within a class I area and to consider,in consultation with the Administrator, whether aproposed major emitting facility will have anadverse impact on such values. [CAA Section165(d)(2)(B)]
  7. 7. Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•  Acid Deposition•  Mercury Deposition•  Ozone (smog)•  Visibility So What?
  8. 8. Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•  Acid Deposition•  Mercury Deposition•  Ozone (smog)•  Visibility
  9. 9. pH5.55.45.35.2 ash river5.1 fernberg wolf ridge 5 hovland4.9 marcell4.84.74.6 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008
  10. 10. Figure 3: Sulfate Deposition During 1999* and Largest Sulfur Dioxide Point Sources**
  11. 11. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819841985 1986
  12. 12. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819851986 1987
  13. 13. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819861987 1988
  14. 14. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819871988 1989
  15. 15. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819881989 1990
  16. 16. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819891990 1991
  17. 17. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819901991 1992
  18. 18. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819911992 1993
  19. 19. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819921993 1994
  20. 20. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819931994 1995
  21. 21. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819941995 1996
  22. 22. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819951996 1997
  23. 23. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819961997 1998
  24. 24. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819971998 1999
  25. 25. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819981999 2000
  26. 26. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200819992000 2001
  27. 27. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820002001 2002
  28. 28. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820012002 2003
  29. 29. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820022003 2004
  30. 30. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820032004 2005
  31. 31. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820042005 2006
  32. 32. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820052006 2007
  33. 33. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820062007 2008
  34. 34. Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition 1985-200820072008 2009
  35. 35. Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•  Acid Deposition•  Mercury Deposition•  Ozone (smog)•  Visibility
  36. 36. Why is Mercury Important ?
  37. 37. What it s All About !
  38. 38. What are We Doing About It? Monitoring Fernberg Station
  39. 39. Trend reversal•  Work done by Monson and others have shown a recent increasing trend in mercury in fish in the Great Lakes states after many years of decrease•  Deposition data does not appear to explain the change in trend•  Climate?
  40. 40. Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•  Acid Deposition•  Mercury Deposition•  Ozone (smog)•  Visibility
  41. 41. Last NAAQS proposal had a REAL secondary std!
  42. 42. Air Quality Impacts to the Forests•  Acid Deposition•  Mercury Deposition•  Ozone (smog)•  Visibility
  43. 43. What Do IMPROVE Data Show ? BWCAW, Minnesota Clear Day Hazy DayNatural Visibility Degraded Visibility> 125 miles < 30 miles
  44. 44. What Does the Visibility Data Show for the BWCAW? BWCAW profile is in between that seen at the typical Eastern site and the typical Western site
  45. 45. So What?What can be done about this?
  46. 46. Fernberg Air Monitoring Site
  47. 47. Where does it come from?
  48. 48. Contribution to 20% Worst Visibility Days at BWCAW in 2018 Outstate Minnesota EGU Outstate Minnesota EGU 8% 13% Outstate Minnesota other point Outstate Minnesota other point Outstate Minnesota NH3 8% Outstate Minnesota off road Outstate Minnesota on road Outstate Minnesota NH3 4% Outstate Minnesota area12% Tw in Cities - all sources 2% Wisconsin 1% Iow a 3% North Dakota Missouri Twin Cities - all sources Illinois 3% Indiana10% Canada Wisconsin Michigan 9% South and West US 2% Eastern US 2% World minus US and Canada Iowa 2% 4% Missouri North Dakota 7% 4% 5%
  49. 49. Regional Haze Glidepath 25.0 Baseline Conditions 20% Worst Days 20.0 2018 RPG: 18.6 dv 15.0Deciviews Natural Conditions 20% Worst Days 10.0 Baseline Conditions 20% Best Days 5.0 Natural Conditions 20% Best Days 0.0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year
  50. 50. Regional Haze - NE Minnesota plan NE Minnesota Emission Reduction Target Year Total Emitted (tpy) 2002 – Combined SO2 and NOX 95,562 2012 Goal – 20% Reduction 76,450 2018 Goal – 30% Reduction 66,894 This area (St. Louis, Lake, Cook, Carlton, Itasca and Koochiching) was targeted because they have a much larger impact on the Class I areas than emissions from farther away. In addition, the taconite facilities may be currently uncontrolled or under-controlled for SO2 or NOX,
  51. 51. MPCA Plan - Air sources of mercury will have a 93% emission reduction goal from 1990 levels by 2025
  52. 52. Change in NOx
  53. 53. Cross Connections•  S: highest contributor to haze and acid rain, also enhances Hg methylation•  N: contributes to acid rain, artificial fertilization, ozone formation and haze•  Climate change –  bleeding organic carbon out of wetlands and hence also increasing acidity and Hg in lakes –  increasing temps also make ozone problem worse regardless of emission reductions
  54. 54. What to Do?•  Its all about N, S, and Hg - with overlay of climate change (CO2)•  Sources and culpability are known•  Haze program and Mercury TMDL are declining emission programs•  This is BOTH a local and a regional/national story•  Don t care how or why emission reductions are made - Time to act is now
  55. 55. Am I the problem or is it the industrial source down the road?
  56. 56. Solution – Sustainable Living•  The agency (MPCA) recommends that more effort be focused on education and partnerships -- as well as specific actions to encourage conservation, efficiency and the use of cleaner renewable energy sources -- to begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Increasing renewable energy production and reducing energy use will not only reduce carbon dioxide, but will also reduce many other pollutants such as fine particles, ozone, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. From: Air Quality in Minnesota — Challenges and Opportunities 2007 Report to the Legislature

×