Air Pollution Calculations: Quantifying Pollutant Formation, Transport, Transformation, Fate and Risks

Air Pollution Calculations

Quantifying Pollutant Formation, Transport, Transformation, Fate And Risks

First Edition

Daniel A. Vallero

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Dedication

Preface

Chapter 1: Introduction

Abstract

1.1 What is air pollution?

1.2 A bit of history

1.3 The science of air pollution

1.4 The atmosphere

1.5 Recent trends

1.6 Spatial scale

1.7 Stressor-receptor paradigm

1.8 Calculation basics

1.9 Systems thinking and sustainability

1.10 Conclusions

Chapter 2: Characterizing air pollutants

Abstract

2.1 The periodic table

2.2 Empirical calculations

2.3 Health characterization

2.4 Formation reactions

2.5 Reaction types

2.6 Pollutant formation processes: Introduction to chemodynamics

2.7 Nonchemical concentrations

Chapter 3: Pollutant transformation

Abstract

3.1 Introduction

3.2 The compound

3.3 Air pollution kinetics

3.4 Energy in atmospheric transformations [12]

3.5 Atmospheric kinetics calculations

3.6 Transformation thermodynamics

Chapter 4: Environmental partitioning

Abstract

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Equilibrium

4.3 Partitioning and transport

4.4 Integrating inherent properties and substrate characteristics

4.5 Movement from liquid to solid phase

4.6 The octanol-water coefficient

4.7 Partitioning between air and tissue

4.8 Conclusions

Chapter 5: Air partitioning

Abstract

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Henry’s law revisited

5.3 Movement into the atmosphere

5.4 Interfaces

5.5 Partitioning between air and tissue

Chapter 6: Physical transport of air pollutants

Abstract

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Partitioning meets the laws of motion

6.3 Diffusion and biological processes

6.4 Partitioning, transport and kinetics

Chapter 7: Water and the atmosphere

Abstract

7.1 Introduction

7.2 The water molecule as an agent of change

7.3 The hydrosphere

7.4 Ionization, acidity and alkalinity [8]

7.5 Pollutant deposition from the hydrosphere

7.6 Intercompartmental exchange to and from the hydrosphere

7.7 Water, oxygen and energy relationships

7.8 Reactions with water

Chapter 8: Air pollution biogeochemistry

Abstract

8.1 Introduction

8.2 Spheres and cycles

8.3 Carbon equilibrium and cycling

8.4 Nutrient cycling

8.5 Metal and metalloid cycles

8.6 Biogeochemical cycles and decision making

Chapter 9: Thermal reactions

Abstract

9.1 Introduction

9.2 Air and combustion

9.3 Volatility of combustion products

9.4 Flue gas

9.5 Thermal pollutant destruction

9.6 Activation energy

9.7 Nitrogen and sulfur

9.8 Metals in thermal reactions

Chapter 10: Air pollution phases and flows

Abstract

10.1 Introduction

10.2 Gas-phase pollutants

10.3 Fluid dynamics

10.4 Aerosols

10.5 Concentration

Chapter 11: Sampling and analysis

Abstract

11.1 Introduction

11.2 Quality assurance

11.3 Data quality objectives

11.4 Sampling air pollutant emissions and releases

11.5 Ambient air pollution monitoring

11.6 Ambient air pollutant sampling

11.7 Gas and vapor phase measurement methods

11.8 Methods for specific pollutants

11.9 Particulate matter

11.10 Measuring gas and particulate phases together

11.11 Laboratory analysis

Chapter 12: Air pollution risk calculations

Abstract

12.1 Introduction

12.2 Accountability based on risk reduction and sustainability

12.3 Defining risk

12.4 Dose-response curves

12.5 Uncertainty and factors of safety

12.6 Exposure estimation

12.7 Direct cancer risk calculations [3]

12.8 Risk-based treatment targets

12.9 Causality

Chapter 13: Air pollution control technologies

Abstract

13.1 Introduction

13.2 Particulate matter controls

13.3 Forces

13.4 Particle morphology [5]

13.5 Mechanisms of particulate removal

13.6 Aerosol removal technologies

13.7 Removal of liquid droplets and mists

13.8 Gas-phase pollutant controls

13.9 Air pollutant treatment technologies

13.10 Removal of odors

Chapter 14: Air pollution dispersion models

Abstract

14.1 Introduction

14.2 Meteorological data and graphics

14.3 Gaussian models

14.4 Stability

14.5 Eulerian models

14.6 Model levels

14.7 Model uncertainty

14.8 Links to exposure and dose models

14.9 Recent advances

Chapter 15: Economics and project management

Abstract

15.1 Introduction

15.2 Emission strategies

15.3 Engineering economics

15.4 Comparing alternatives

15.5 Replacement cost analysis

15.6 Life cycle comparisons

Chapter 16: Reliability and failure

Abstract

16.1 Introduction

16.2 Failure classification

16.3 Margins of safety

16.4 Success

Chapter 17: Air pollution decision-making

Abstract

17.1 Introduction

17.2 Data-based decision-making

17.3 Ethics

17.4 Ethical analysis of decisions and actions

17.5 Linking causes and outcomes

17.6 Analysis of complex air pollution problems

Appendix 1: Key equations

Atmospheric Chemistry

Atmospheric Physics

Partitioning

Meteorology

Biogeochemistry

Air Pollution Engineering

Geometry

Statistics

Air Pollution Risk

Dispersion Modeling

Reliability

Air Pollution Economics

Appendix 2: Abbreviations and symbols

Index

Copyright

Elsevier

Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands

The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom

50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-12-814934-8

For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Candice Janco

Acquisition Editor: Laura S. Kelleher

Editorial Project Manager: Emily Thomson

Production Project Manager: Omer Mukthar

Designer: Matthew Limbert

Typeset by SPi Global, India

Dedication

To my wife, Janis. To paraphrase the Hollies, you have been the air that I breathe.

Daniel A. Vallero

Preface

Daniel A. Vallero

There are three basic types of nonfiction books that deal with environmental subject matter: descriptive, quantitative, and quantitatively descriptive. Descriptive books usually have the broadest readership, often for a general readership. They are devoid of equations and symbols. Instead, they rely on narratives about particular events and policies. Barry Commoner's, Rachel Carson's, and Al Gore's books fall into this category. They often have a few major points they want to make, such as the need to take actions to prevent cancer, protect endangered species, or restore and prevent the loss of habitat.

In descriptive books, the authors have information and knowledge that they want to share in order to build or enhance the reader's awareness of a particular environmental or public health problem, such as global warming or asbestos in consumer products. They have the luxury of addressing a single or just a few topics and do not worry about all the other aspects involved. In this sense, they are often better reads at the beach or over the morning coffee. In my opinion, the principal driving force behind this type of environmental book is awareness.

Quantitative books are most popular with scientists and, especially, engineers. They are also descriptive but describe phenomena and processes using numbers, symbols, equations, and technical jargon. In addition to the attention to detail, they are usually much more expansive in their treatment of environmental subject matter. I believe this is because books are not the principal means by which specific scientific information is shared. This is mainly done by journal articles. As such, quantitative environmental books are the beneficiaries of the massive amount of scientific findings in peer-reviewed journals. Air pollution books, for example, do not usually present the results of the author's own experiments for the first time. If they do present such results, the author has already published them in a peer-reviewed journal article. And, quite likely, most of the results presented are those of other scientists. The book author has chosen them to illustrate a point and to use the equations and coefficients derived by these legions of researchers and professionals who have made the effort to submit their findings to the scrutiny of the scientific community.

In this sense, the author of a quantitative environmental book is a messenger. The principal driving force for a quantitative book is the need to explain how things work. The author, hopefully, has much experience in applying the methods and is sharing this with the readership. To do so, it requires that the reader begins with a threshold of knowledge, usually much higher than what is required of the descriptive environmental book reader. I liken this to a prerequisite college course. Taking an air pollution modeling course based on a particular software would be very difficult if the student had not already completed the software course. Similarly, reading a quantitative atmospheric book would be very difficult without a modicum of knowledge of algebra and physics. Usually, however, the book will build knowledge, not only of the subject matter but also of new applications, both mathematical and physical. That is, the atmospheric science book not only improves one’s knowledge of the atmosphere but also enhances the general mathematical and scientific acumen of the reader. I believe the best way to learn science is experiential and the quantitative book is a virtual way to experience environmental phenomena and processes.

The third type of the book, the hybrid, combines narrative descriptions with quantitation. A phenomenon is described but is explained further using symbolic and technical tools. For example, completely describing a disaster requires descriptive information, for example, time lines, historical events, key players, and adverse outcomes. Not only describing the toxic plume in Bhopal, India, requires this type of information, but also it needs chemical information, for example, physical and chemical factors of the released chemical, methyl isocyanate, its biological toxicological information, geographic doses, and other quantitative information.

My book, Fundamentals of Air Pollution, falls into this category. Actually, the book had three previous editions before mine. When I reviewed the third edition, I found it to be an excellent documentation of the progress in addressing air pollution in the United States. It certainly had a wealth of quantitative information, but much of the book was highly descriptive. I attempted to add quantitation in the fourth edition but still thought it needed substantial quantitative information to explain the many air pollution processes, including the diseases and other outcomes, air pollution control technologies, and spatial and temporal complexities. I completely revamped the book in the fifth edition, including a substantial amount of quantitative information.

After this effort, it became clear to me that explaining air pollution problems requires more than a cursory combination of descriptive and quantitative answers to questions at the end of each chapter of an air pollution book. In fact, instructors who use my book asked specifically for quantitative answers, which I take to mean a dedicated resource. In my opinion, I suspect those of others who teach air pollution courses and who practice in field that addresses air pollution would appreciate such a resource. This suspicion led to the book you are reading. Not only did I hope it would be a companion to Fundamentals of Air Pollution, but also I have striven to make it a companion to any air pollution book. In this sense, its primary aim is to make the concepts and topics more real to the reader.

I am told that most people, including engineers and scientists, are predominantly experiential learners. We learn very little by simply reading about or seeing something and even less hearing about it. We are empathic readers who must insert ourselves into a situation. We learn more effectively by experiencing, at least virtually, than by merely watching. And since mathematics and quantification are the tools of engineering and science, the examples in this book provide a step toward experience in the matters of air pollution. The experience is vicarious, but the problems presented are exactly the types being confronted daily by decision-makers, scientists, and engineers. Indeed, it is possible that I have borrowed, and hopefully acknowledged one or a few of your own experiences. If so, I am grateful to your contributions to clean air. Even if reading this book is your first step, I look forward to your future contributions to clean air, with a hope that this book will have added to your success.

Chapter 1

Introduction

Abstract

This chapter introduces air pollution, including the need for meaningful calculations. This begins with the historical context of air pollution problems and controls. This is followed by a discussion of the scientific method and credible engineering as they apply to air pollution. This includes physical, chemical, and biological principles, with in-depth discussions and example calculations of atmospheric structure and composition. The mathematical and statistical tools need for air pollution calculations are introduced. The chapter ends with a discussion of air pollutants and the damage they can cause, that is, stressor-receptor linkages.

Keywords

Air pollution; Black smoke; Aerosols; Ultraviolet light; Troposphere; Scale and complexity; Greenhouse effect; Standard conditions; Atmospheric pressure; Stressor; Receptor; Air quality index

1.1 What is air pollution?

Air pollution can be studied from numerous perspectives. Researchers often choose a very specific aspect of air pollution and delve deeply into its meaning. They need to understand mathematics and the basic sciences to learn what has already known and to extend this knowledge to their needs. Air pollution is the presence of contaminants or substances in the air that interfere with human health or welfare or produce other harmful environmental effects [1].

This definition requires context, that is, something is an air pollutant if it causes conditions to deviate from a desired state. Thus, an air pollutant interferes a benchmark of a desired condition that, at a minimum, provides for air quality that supports human and other life. However, the definition goes beyond health and extends to welfare, including ecological condition and societal well-being. From a system perspective, the sum of these desired states is, in fact, a single desired state. Pope Francis put this succinctly in his encyclical letter, Laudato sí [2]:

Some forms of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor, and causes millions of premature deaths. People take sick, for example, from breathing high levels of smoke from fuels used in cooking or heating. There is also pollution that affects everyone, caused by transport, industrial fumes, and substances that contribute to the acidification of soil and water, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, and agrotoxins in general.

Thermodynamically speaking, an air pollutant or any pollutant is the result of inefficiency. The pollutant is mass or energy that is exiting a control volume. In trying to produce something of value, a waste product is released to the atmosphere. Not all scientists are researchers. Indeed, some of the best scientists are those who apply what researchers have discovered. Such scientists work in national, state, provincial, and local government agencies with missions to protect the environment. They write regulations, rules, and guidance and issue permits and licenses on emissions and ambient air quality protections.

Often in combating air pollution, the researchers and regulatory scientists and engineers work closely together. For example, in the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has three basic functions: (1) to conduct research, (2) to enforce environmental rules and regulations, and (3) to provide funding for other entities to help with the first two functions. EPA’s air pollution enforcement and compliance work is conducted by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) and its 10 regional offices, and its research is conducted by the Office of Research and Development (ORD). To demonstrate the collaboration between research, development, technology transfer, and enforcement of air pollution laws, OAQPS and ORD’s air programs are conducted on the same campus in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. ORD funds and collaborates on air quality research with numerous universities and institutions.

There are other perspectives in addition to research and enforcement, including teaching, journalism, and policy making. Those who educate others and write about and promulgate polices and laws must understand air pollution in different ways but with a modicum of science.

Understanding the principles of air pollution and the calculations involved is something we all share, although the extent and specificity of these calculations vary. For example, a research scientist may need to completely explain all the reactions in a combustion facility that lead to the generation of a toxic compound, for example, benzo(a)pyrene (BaP). The air emissions permit writer does not ordinarily need to know all the reactions to the extent of the researcher, but enough to know which ones may be most difficult to change. The high school chemistry teacher may need to know only the most basic chemical reactions, but the air pollution engineering college professor may need to know just as much as the researcher to tailor the lectures and homework properly to the target student. The journalist who can do the math and grasp the scientific principles has an advantage over her colleagues that only know the essence of the science. The local air pollution authority manager may need to know as much as the permit writer, since he supervises the permit writers. The politician who serves on a technical committee responsible for writing air pollution legislation will need to know more than the other members of the legislature, perhaps even grasp the math and science, as well as the permit writer and the researcher, at least to the extent of knowing whether to increase or decrease funding.

Therefore, every air pollution perspective requires an aptitude and appreciation for calculations. This book attempts to provide examples of most of the types of calculations one may encounter, whether to succeed in one’s career or simply to trust what one reads in a report or article.

1.2 A bit of history

Not long ago, making environmental decisions based on and underpinned by sound physical and biological science was not the norm compared with those made for other reasons [3]. At first, the weight of environmental factors was based on theory and limited, isolated studies. Indeed, science-based air pollution decision-making was tracked directly with the experiences of contagious diseases. Even after germ theory took hold in the biological research community, there was substantial time before public health decisions became predominantly based on contagion data. A rather large body of theory testing occurred before John Snow was able to make the famous decision to intervene and insist on infection controls by banning the use of contaminated Thames River water to abate the outbreak of the Broad Street cholera epidemic in the mid-19th century [4, 5].

Concerns about air pollution predated Snow’s work. For centuries, people have known intuitively that something was amiss when their air was filled with smoke or when they smelled an unpleasant odor. But, for most pollutants, those that were not readily sensed without the aid of sensitive equipment, a baseline had to be set to begin to act. One way to look at the interferences mentioned in the definition is to place them within the context of harm. Harm can be acceptable, so long as it is sufficiently unavoidable and arises only due to obtaining a more favored good or service. The objects of the harm have received varying levels of interests. In the 1960s, the perception of harm to ecosystems grew as larger number of people perceived that the very survival of certain biological species was threatened and that these threats extended to humans. Indeed, the direct harm to humans was perceived earlier than those to ecosystems, especially in terms of diseases directly associated with obvious episodes, such as respiratory diseases and even death associated with combinations of weather and pollutant releases [6].

Myriad pollutant emissions have accompanied the industrial and technological eras. Nuclear power plants are associated with the possibilities of meltdown and the release of airborne radioactive materials. Burning fossil fuels releases products of incomplete combustion, for example, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Even complete combustion releases the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2). Leaks from chemical, pesticide, and other manufacturing facilities may cause exposures to toxic substances, such as the release of methyl isocyanate in Bhopal, India. In the last quarter of 20th century, these apprehensions led to the public’s growing wariness about toxic chemicals added to the more familiar conventional pollutants like soot, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen and sulfur. Toxic chemical exposures were increasingly linked to cancer and threats to hormonal systems in humans and wildlife, neurotoxicity (notably from lead and mercury exposure in children), and immune system disorders.

Some substances thought to be almost exclusively water or food contaminants were found in the air. For example, the source blood lead (blood-Pb) levels in children were initially thought to be pica, that is, eating chips of lead paint. However, the Pb concentrations declined precipitously in children living near roadways following the decreased use of tetraethyl lead and other Pb organometallic compounds in gasoline, which may have accounted for more than half of blood-Pb in the 1970s [7].

Growing numbers of studies have provided evidence linking disease and adverse effects to extremely low levels of certain particularly toxic substances. For example, exposure to dioxin at almost any level above what science could detect could be associated with numerous adverse effects in humans.

At the threshold of the new millennium, the need to consider air pollution within the context of larger-scale environmental systems became obvious, including the loss of aquatic diversity in lakes due to deposition of acidic precipitation, so-called acid rain. Acid deposition was also being associated with the corrosion of materials, including some of the most important human-made structures, such as the pyramids in Egypt and monuments throughout the world. Presently, global pollutants have become the source of public concern, such as those that seemed to be destroying the stratospheric ozone layer or those that appeared to be affecting the global climate. This escalation of awareness of the multitude of pollutants complicated matters.

To set the stage for air pollution calculations, let us consider to some air pollution events to begin to understand why we need sound approaches that have evolved from lessons learned over time [8]. In addition to the need to hunt and gather, early people were nomadic because they wanted to exit the stench of the animal, vegetable, and human wastes that they generated. Within enclosed dwellings, air pollutants accumulated. For centuries, the open-fire emissions created smoked that lingered. Thus, among the first air pollution control technology was the chimney, which helped to remove the combustion products and cooking odors from the living quarters. This was not only a boon to indoor air quality but also an early lesson in the cumulative sources’ impact on ambient air. This was aptly stated in ad 61 by the Roman philosopher Seneca:

As soon as I had gotten out of the heavy air of Rome and from the stink of the smoky chimneys thereof, which, being stirred, poured forth whatever pestilential vapors and soot they had enclosed in them, I felt an alteration of my disposition [9].

Eleanor of Aquitaine, the wife of King Henry II of England, moved from her castle in the year 1157 because wood smoke was generating so much air pollution [6]. In 1306, Edward I issued a royal proclamation enjoining the use of sea coal in furnaces in London. Elizabeth I barred the burning of coal in London when Parliament was in session. Perhaps as an early lesson in the difference between promulgating air pollution law and the ability to enforce it, coal continued to be burned despite these royal edicts. As evidence, by 1661, London’s air had become sufficiently polluted that John Evelyn submit to King Charles II and Parliament a brochure entitled, Fumifugium: or the Inconvenience of the Aer, and Smoak of London Dissipated (together with some remedies humbly proposed) [10]. This lays out several proposed actions that are viable and used today [11].

The principal industries associated with the production of air pollution in the centuries preceding the industrial revolution were metallurgy, ceramics, and preservation of animal products. In the bronze and iron ages, villages were exposed to dust and fumes from many sources. Native copper and gold were forged, and clay was baked and glazed to form pottery and bricks before 4000 BCE. Iron was in common use, and leather was tanned before 1000 BCE. Most of the methods of modern metallurgy were known before ad 1. They relied on charcoal rather than coal or coke. However, coal was mined and used for fuel before ad 1000, although it was not made into coke until about 1600; and coke did not enter metallurgical practice significantly until about 1700. These industries and their effluents as they existed before 1556 are best described in the book De Re Metallica published in that year by Georg Bauer, known as Georgius Agricola. It was translated into English by President (and engineer) Herbert Clark Hoover and his wife [12]. Combustion in kilns generated air pollution even before the industrial revolution. For example, ceramics [13] and animal product preservation industries [14] burned various materials to heat kilns.

The industrial revolution soon began after it was found that harnessing of steam could provide power to pump water and to move heavy objects. Early in the eighteenth century, Savery, Papin, and Newcomen designed their pumping engines and culminated in 1784 in Watt’s reciprocating engine. The reciprocating steam engine was ubiquitous in industry until it was displaced by the steam turbine in the twentieth century. During most of the nineteenth century, coal was the principal fuel used to make steam, although some oil was used for this purpose late in the century. Thus, the predominant air pollution problem of the nineteenth century was smoke and ash from the burning of coal or oil in the boiler furnaces of stationary power plants, locomotives, marine vessels, and in-home heating fireplaces and furnaces. Great Britain took the lead in addressing this problem, and in the words of Sir Hugh Beaver [15],

By 1819, there was sufficient pressure for Parliament to appoint the first of a whole dynasty of committees to consider how far persons using steam engines and furnaces could work them in a manner less prejudicial to public health and comfort. This committee confirmed the practicability of smoke prevention, as so many succeeding committees were to do, but as was often again to be experienced, nothing was done.

In 1845, during the height of the great railway boom, an act of Parliament required that locomotives consume their own smoke and 2 years later applied the same requirement to factory furnaces. These and later laws were passed with limited success. Air pollution from the emerging chemical industry was considered a separate matter and was made the responsibility of the Alkali Inspectorate created by the Alkali Act of 1863. As opposed to the kingdom-wide proclamations in Britain, the United States considered smoke abatement (as air pollution control was then known) be a municipal responsibility. No federal or state smoke abatement laws or regulations were promulgated until the next century. The first municipal ordinances and regulations limiting the emission of black smoke and ash appeared in the 1880s and were directed toward industrial, locomotive, and marine rather than domestic sources. By the end of the 19th century, smelting of sulfide ores was identified as the source of crop damage.

Air pollution control technology in the 19th century began to look like those in use today, including improved fuel feed technologies, especially stokers for mechanical firing of coal, scrubbers to remove acid gases from effluent gas streams, and cyclones and fabric filters (baghouses) to collect particulate matter (PM). Also, with the growth of scientific knowledge, physical and chemical principles began to replace or at least augment trial and error and intuitive processes in pollution control design.

The first quarter of the 20th century experienced dramatic changes in the technology of both the production of air pollution and its engineering control. However, this was not accompanied by substantial changes in legislation, regulations, understanding of the problem, or public attitudes toward the air quality. As cities and factories grew, the severity of the pollution problem increased.

A big technological change was the replacement of the steam engine by the electric motor as the means of operating machinery and pumping water. This substantially transferred the smoke and ash emission from the boiler house of the factory to the boiler house of the electric generating station. At the start of this period, coal was hand-fired in the boiler house; by the middle of the period, it was mechanically fired by stokers, but by the end of the period, pulverized coal, oil, and gas firing had begun to dominate. Each form of firing produced its own characteristic emissions to the atmosphere.

Steam locomotives started to enter central business districts in the heart of the larger cities. Later, the urban terminals of many railroads had been electrified, thereby transferring much air pollution from the railroad right-of-way to the electric generating station. The replacement of coal by oil in many applications decreased ash emissions from those sources. There was rapid technological change in industry. However, the most significant change was the rapid increase in the number of automobiles from almost none at the turn of the century to millions by 1925. The principal technological changes in the engineering control of air pollution were the perfection of the motor-driven fan, which allowed large-scale gas-treating systems to be built; the invention of the electrostatic precipitator, which made particulate control in many processes feasible; and the development of a chemical engineering capability for the design of process equipment, which made the control of gas and vapor effluents feasible.

The first large-scale surveys of air pollution were undertaken—Salt Lake City, Utah (1926) [16]; New York City (1937) [17]; and Leicester, England (1939) [18]. By mid-20th century, major air pollution became almost ubiquitous in urban areas. Public health disasters, including air pollution-related deaths, occurred in the Europe and North America. The Meuse Valley, Belgium, episode occurred in 1930 [19]; the Donora, Pennsylvania, episode occurred in 1948 [20]; and the Poza Rica, Mexico, episode in 1950 [21]. Smog appeared in Los Angeles in the 1940s. In response, the first National Air Pollution Symposium in the United States was held in Pasadena, California in 1949 [22], and the first US Technical Conference on Air Pollution was held in Washington, DC, in 1950 [23].

Building of natural gas pipelines resulted in rapid displacement of coal and oil as home heating fuels resulting in dramatic improvement in air quality; witness the much-publicized decrease in black smoke in Pittsburgh (Fig. 1.1) and St. Louis [6]. The diesel locomotive began to displace the steam locomotive, thereby slowing the pace of railroad electrification. The internal combustion engine bus started its displacement of the electrified streetcar. The love for the automobile continued to grow, and the numbers on the road proliferated.

Fig. 1.1 (A) Pittsburgh after the decrease in black smoke. (B) Pittsburgh before the decrease in black smoke. (Source: (A) Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.)

During this period, substantial national air pollution legislation or regulations were not adopted anywhere in the world until the first state air pollution law in the United States was adopted by California in 1947.

1.2.1 Black smoke

Great Britain experienced a major air pollution disaster in London in 1952, which led to the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1956 and an expansion of the authority of the Alkali Inspectorate [24, 25]. The new law target home heating, which had been mainly done by burning soft coal on grates in separate fireplaces in each room. This led to a successful substitute of much lower-smoke fuels and central or electric heating instead of fireplace heating.

The outcome was a decrease in smoke concentration. This was determined by measuring the interference of visible light, referred to as blackness of paper filters that collect air. The opacity of the filter is proportional to the amount of soot and dust on the filter. These opacity readings improved from 175 μg m− 3 in 1958 to 75 μg m− 3 in 1968 [26]. Today, the filters are weighed before and after passage of air, but the percentage of black carbon is still of interest. Thus, variations on this British method, now known as the black smoke (BS) method, are still in use. The updated BS method, known as the filter smoke number (FSN), draws air through a pipe at constant temperature (see Fig. 1.2) [27]. It typically requires 26 impacting samples from a 4.5 μm inlet, through which the air to be measured flows onto white filter paper, which is stained. The stained filter is analyzed for blackness of the stain is 27 measured by light absorption. The blackness or darkness of the stain is measured using a reflectometer. Smoke particles composed of elemental carbon (EC) typically contribute the most stain darkness.

Fig. 1.2 Apparatus for black smoke (BS) method. The effective sampling length is 405 mm. The dead volume is the volume of gas away from the sampling point in the pipe up to the filter paper, which includes the probe and lines. The opacity of the filter area is measured using a reflectometer. (Modified from A.L. GmbH, Smoke Value Measurement with the Filter Paper Method, Application Notes, Graz, Austria, AVL1007E (2005), vol. Revision 2.)

The mix of ambient particles varies widely spatially and seasonally. Thus, the correlation between BS measurements and PM mass is highly specific to the place and time of measurement, making comparisons difficult [29]. Thus, the conversions of the opacity readings mentioned above are conversions from blackness on paper filters to mass per volume of soot and dust. However, before the end of the 20th century, opacity readings were mainly used to quantify PM. As mentioned, PM is now mainly quantified using monitors that differentiate particle diameters, especially 10 and 2.5 μm, by mass. So, this begs the question, how were these early BS method results converted to specific values of 175 μg m− 3 in 1958 to 75 μg m− 3 in 1968?

The answer is that empirically derived conversions were applied. For reflectometer readings of 40–99, the following formula is used [30]:

where C = concentration in μg m− 3; V = volume of air sampled, in cubic feet (m³ is converted to cubic feet by multiplying by 35.315); R = reflectometer reading; and F = a factor relating to the sampler clamp size:

0.288 for 0.5 in. clamp

1.00 for 1 in. clamp

3.68 for 2 in. clamp

12.80 for 4 in. clam

This formula represents the calibration curve to within ± 1.3% over the range of reflectometer readings between 40 and 90. When used to calculate concentrations from reflectometer readings between 91 and 98, the results may be underestimated by as much as 6%. For darker stains with reflectometer readings between 40 and 20, the formula used is C = si2_e × (214,245.1 − 15,130.512 R + 508.181 R² – 8.831144 R³ + 0.0628057 R⁴). Thus, the 175 and 75 values could have been reported as 175 ± 2 and 75 ± 1, respectively. Such ratios are important because we need to compare readings over decades, or even centuries, during which time measurement technologies continue to improve and methods are replaced. Thus, there have been several studies attempting to compare BS method results with later, direct PM measurements [27, 31–33].

1.2.2 Recent history

In the middle of the 20th century, almost every country in Europe and Japan, Australia, and New Zealand experienced serious air pollution in its larger cities, with each enacting national air pollution control legislation. By 1980, air pollution institutions emerged, including Warren Springs Laboratory, Stevenage, England; the Institut National de la Santé et de las Recherche Medicale at Le Visinet, France; the Rijksinstituut Voor de Volksgezondheid, Bilthoven and the Instituut voor Gezondheidstechniek-TNO, Delft, the Netherlands; the Statens Naturvardsverk, Solna, Sweden; the Institut für Wasser-Bodenund Luft-hygiene, Berlin; and the Landensanstalt für Immissions und Bodennutzungsshutz, Essen, Germany, along with many in Japan.

Smog in the United States continued to worsen, notably in Los Angeles, but extending to large cities throughout the nation. In 1955, the first federal air pollution legislation was enacted, which funded research, training, and technical assistance. The Public Health Service (PHS) of the US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare oversaw these efforts until 1970, when it was transferred to the newly formed EPA. The initial federal legislation was amended and extended several times between 1955 and 1980, greatly increasing federal authority, particularly in emissions control [34]. The automobile continued to proliferate, peaking in 2005 and declining substantially in 2009 and 2010, likely due to the economic recession. However, the rest of the world has continued to increase vehicle ownership. Global production of motor vehicles increased from approximately 54 million in 1997 to 95 million in 2016. In fact, China produced twice as many vehicles as either the United States or Japan in 2016 (over 28 million compared with 12 million in the United States and 9 million in Japan) [35].

Air pollution technologies grew rapidly from the 1950s to the 1970s, focusing predominantly on automotive air pollution and its control, as well as oxides of sulfur (SOx) pollution and its control by sulfur oxide removal from flue gases and fuel desulfurization, and on control oxides of nitrogen, especially nitrogen dioxide (NO2) produced in combustion processes [6].

Air pollution meteorology became a separate discipline. By 1980, mathematical models of the pollution of the atmosphere were being energetically developed. A start had been made in elucidating the photochemistry of air pollution. Air quality monitoring systems became operational throughout the world. A wide variety of measuring instruments became available, many of which are very similar to those being used today.

Environmental protection became almost universally accepted in the 1970s. Organizationally, this has taken the form of departments or ministries of the environment in governments at all levels throughout the world. In addition to national agencies, states, provinces, counties and cities took on greater responsibility for air and water quality, sold waste sanitation, noise abatement, and control of the hazards associated with radiation and the use of pesticides. This is paralleled in industry, where formerly diffuse responsibility for these areas is increasingly the responsibility of environmental protection departments. Similar changes became evident in research and education institutions.

More recently, attention was directed to the problems caused by the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer by chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), long-range transport of pollution (especially persistent organic pollutants, i.e., POPs), Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), and acidic deposition. Disasters have recently highlighted the importance of air pollution. The meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear power facility in Japan and the potential for attendant migration of radioisotopes created concern on the West Coast of North America. Like the PBT pollution of Inuit peoples, Fukushima served as another reminder that pollutants can travel thousands of miles in winds aloft. Wildfires in North and biomass burning in South America have released large amounts of PM and other air pollutants. Even what would be considered water disasters, the huge oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico and around the world had to include measurements of volatile organic compounds and other potential airborne contaminants.

As we shall see when discussing combustion efficiencies, one of the indicators of success is the production of carbon dioxide (CO2). The presence of water and CO2 means we have complete combustion and have avoided producing many very toxic and persistent air pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO) and polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs), known as products of incomplete combustion (PICs). More recently, however, the product of complete combustion, CO2, is also a greenhouse gas.

There are many successes, but industrial pollution continues to be a worldwide and growing problem. Hopefully, developing nations will not repeat the 20th century problems experienced by Western nations and will apply lessons without having to suffer the consequences of side effects from economic development.

Air pollution problems are not solely the result of industry. In fact, a problem that originally plagued residences in London and other developed nations centuries ago remains among the worst air pollution problems worldwide. Open-fire and other solid-fuel cookstoves may be responsible for four million premature deaths annually, especially in developing nations [36].

1.3 The science of air pollution

Understanding air pollution begins with the physical sciences. The atmosphere is one of the spheres of importance to environment. It surrounds the globe and interacts with and connects the earth’s surface to space. As such, all physical processes are at work in the atmosphere, including gravity, pressure, friction, and exchanges of matter and energy. The atmosphere is the major system by which substances are transported and transformed into either essential or detrimental compounds that we breath.

Like most air pollution texts, chemical air pollutants dominate this book. However, pollutants can also be physical and biological. The energy from ultraviolet (UV) light is an example of a physical stressor. Although exposure is to the physical contamination, that is, energy at this wavelength, the exposure has been indirectly increased by chemical contamination. For example, the release of chemicals into the atmosphere, in turn react with ozone in the stratosphere, decreasing the ozone concentration and increasing the amount of UV radiation at the earth’s surface. This has meant that the mean UV dose in the temperate zones of the world has increased. This has been associated with an increase in the incidence of skin cancer, especially the most virulent form, melanoma.

Air pollutants may also be biological, as when bacteria and viruses are released to the atmosphere from medical facilities. Other biological air pollutants include irritants and allergens, such as pollen and molds (i.e., bioaerosols).

Thus, calculations related to the structure of the atmosphere are crucial to science that underpins air pollution decisions. The troposphere, that is, the lowest atmospheric layer, is the major location of most air pollution. However, the stratosphere is also important, since it contains the ozone layer, which absorbs much of the incoming ultraviolet (UV) light. When the stratospheric ozone (O3) concentrations fall, exposures to UV increase, which damages skin cells and can lead to chronic problems, notably increased incidence of melanoma, the most virulent form of skin cancer.

This book approaches air pollution from a question-and-answer perspective. Questioning is the very essence of air quality. Some of the questions go back to the earliest times of human existence, like why does the air smell so bad or when I burn different things, why does the smoke look different? Modern questions are often different only in details, such as what chemicals make the smoke smell this way or what chemicals are in the fuel that lead to smog?

There are myriad questions about air pollution. Some can be readily and completely answered. Most can be answered only under stipulated scientific conditions. Some have more than one answer. Some have answers that will differ depending on whom one asks. Each of these types of questions is asked in this book.

1.4 The atmosphere

The concentration of gases is often the first expression of atmosphere. At the global scale, the gas concentrations are usually described by volume rather than by weight. The presence of water is always a consideration in environmental sciences and engineering. This is no different for atmospheric science. Water in its various physical states, that is, solid, liquid, or gas, is found at some concentration in most of the lower atmosphere. The vapor phase of water in the atmosphere is commonly referred to as humidity. Given the varying amounts of humidity, meteorologists and atmospheric scientists often express gas concentrations as dry volume, that is, no humidity. By dry volume, 99.997% of the atmosphere consists of four gases, molecular nitrogen and oxygen (N2 and O2, respectively), argon (Ar), and carbon dioxide (CO2). Chemically, Ar is inert (nonreactive) since it is a noble gas. The other three compounds are also very stable and nonreactive under atmospheric conditions of temperature and pressure, so they remain very stable components of the atmosphere. Approximately 99% of the mass of the atmosphere lies within 50 km (km) of the Earth’s surface, that is, in the troposphere (lowest level) and stratosphere. This is where air pollution occurs.

The earth’s atmospheric temperature varies with altitude (Fig. 1.3), as does the density of the substances comprising the atmosphere. The earth is warmed when incoming solar radiation is absorbed at or near the earth’s surface and reradiated at longer electromagnetic wavelengths (infrared). In general, the air grows progressively less dense with increasing altitude moving upward from the troposphere through the stratosphere and the chemosphere to the ionosphere. In the upper reaches of the ionosphere, the gaseous molecules are few and far between as compared with the troposphere.

Fig. 1.3 Temperature profile of the Earth’s atmosphere.

The ionosphere and chemosphere are of interest to space scientists because they must be traversed by space vehicles en route to or from the moon or the planets, and they are also regions in which satellites travel in the earth’s orbit. These regions are also of interest to communication scientists because of their influence on radio communications. However, these layers are of interest to air pollution scientists primarily because of their absorption and scattering of solar energy, which influence the amount and spectral distribution of solar energy and cosmic rays reaching the stratosphere and troposphere.

The stratosphere is of interest to a wide range of scientists and engineers. Aeronautical scientists and engineers see it as a layer to traverse when exiting the earth’s orbit but also because it has been traversed by airplanes like the supersonic transport (SST) planes in the late 20th century. The stratosphere is also the venue of communication scientists who must consider ionization and other factors to provide reliable radio, television, and satellite communications.

Air pollution scientists and engineers must also be familiar with the stratosphere for numerous reasons. Chemical compounds are formed and transformed there. Persistent chemicals can move thousands of miles via global transport. For example, debris from aboveground nuclear tests and volcanic eruptions can be suspended for protracted periods of time within the stratosphere given the intense rates of absorption and scattering of solar energy. Arguably, the best-known reason for air pollution experts to care about the stratosphere is that the lower layers contain the ozone layer, which absorbs harmful ultraviolet (UV) solar radiation. The layer has been threatened by chemicals, especially the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), several of which have been banned as a result. Global change scientists are also concerned about CFCs and other gases released at the earth’s surface or by high-altitude aircraft.

1.4.1 Tropospheric physics

Most air pollution occurs in the troposphere, so except for stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change, air pollution texts, including this one, almost exclusively address pollution near the earth’s surface. Thus, we need to understand the mechanisms responsible for gas and particle concentrations and mixing in the troposphere. These mechanisms not only are keys to estimating where pollutants form and move but also help to explain the likelihood that humans and ecosystems will be exposed to air pollutants. We can begin by posing and answering a few questions about atmospheric gases.

What is the mixing ratio? What advantage is there to using this as opposed to concentrations of gases in the atmosphere?

The general definition is the ratio of the amount of a single substance to the total amount of all substances in a mixture. In air pollution, this can be either a mole ratio (ri) or mass ratio (ζi):

si3_e    (1.1)

where ni = the amount (e.g., moles) of the single substance and ntotal = the total amount of the mixture.

si4_e    (1.2)

where mi = the mass of the single substance and mtotal = the total mass of the mixture.

So, then, why use something seemingly more complicated than simple chemical concentration to express the amount of gases in the atmosphere? The principal reason is that the mixing ratio has the advantage of remaining constant with changing air density, as opposed to listing concentrations (e.g., ppm or mg m− 3). The mixing ratios of some important tropospheric gases are provided in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1

Data from R.M. Goody, Y.L. Yung, Atmospheric Radiation: Theoretical Basis. Oxford University Press, 1995; and D.J. Jacob, Introduction to Atmospheric Chemistry, Princeton University Press, 1999.

Why is the mixing ratio below 100 km altitude in the atmosphere so highly variable for most substances other than molecular nitrogen and the noble gases?

Noble gases have their outer shell filled with electrons so are chemically nonreactive. Thus, their concentrations depend on sources entirely, and do not diminish due to chemical reactions in the upper atmosphere like most other substances. Similarly, N2 is nonreactive except under extreme conditions, for example, very high temperatures and pressures like those in internal combustion engines, where it is oxidized to nitric oxide:

Why do the mixing ratios for methane and nitrous oxide decrease beginning at about 20 km of altitude?

This is the flip side of the previous question. These are much more chemically reactive. Thus, with increasing temperature and photochemistry with altitude, they increasingly degrade.

Why do concentrations of H2O vapor and CO2 vary so much in the atmosphere compared with most other substances?

Water vapor concentrations vary because of continual phase changes caused by changes of temperature. Carbon dioxide variability is related to its uptake and release by plants and, to a lesser degree, its emissions from animals and other organisms from respiration and anthropogenic activities.

What are common atmospheric gases that absorb incoming (shortwave) solar radiation?

Ozone, O2, CO2, and H2O absorb portions of the solar spectrum.

Which gases absorb outgoing thermal (infrared) radiation?

Carbon dioxide, H2O, O3, N2O, CH4, and chlorofluorocarbons absorb portions of the thermal emission spectrum. (Note that ozone and water vapor absorb in both spectral ranges, so they can both shield insolation and hold in heat (see Fig. 1.4).

Fig. 1.4 Radiation transmitted to the atmosphere. (Source: R. Rohde, Radiation Transmitted by the Atmosphere (2007). Based on Data from L. Gordley, B. Marshall, C. Allen, Linepak: Algorithms for Modeling Spectral Transmittance and Radiance 3 (22) (1994) 2016, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Atmospheric_Transmission.png.)

Why does such a small amount of the atmosphere’s gases not drift off into space?

The force of gravity.

Which principal atmospheric gas changes the most in concentration with altitude?

Ozone concentrations increase with height, reaching peak levels in the middle stratosphere, and then decrease up to ~ 50 km. High O3 concentrations are produced in the stratosphere by photodecomposition of O2 and recombination to form O3.

How does the temperature change with altitude in the troposphere and stratosphere?

In the troposphere, temperature

a)decreases with increasing altitude up to ~ 12–15 km,

b)stays the same (i.e., isothermal conditions) within most of the stratosphere,

c)increases with height up to the highest part of the stratosphere,

d)becomes isothermal above the stratosphere before it,

e)decreases with height up to ~ 80 km, and

f)becomes isothermal before it again increases with height.

These changes result from electromagnetic spectral processes that cause warming and cooling, in different regions of the atmosphere, that is, in the troposphere, warming due to reradiation of incoming solar radiation as infrared from the earth’s surface and solar heating and, modulating heating by the stratospheric ozone layer by absorption of UV light, and seasonal changes in the intensity of incoming sunlight and length of daylight due to increasing angles in summer (heating) and decreasing angles in winter (cooling).

What is the spectral range of thermal radiation?

4–30 μm.

At what spectral range is the atmosphere transparent to IR energy (i.e., heating)?

The so-called atmospheric window is the spectral region of ~ 7–14 μm. The atmosphere in this spectral region is, generally, transparent to the emission of infrared energy.

What are the major sources of CH4 and CO2 in the environment? How do these two compounds relate to each other?

> 60% of the world’s CH4 emissions come from human activities. It is emitted from industries, agriculture, and waste treatment. Natural gas and petroleum systems are the largest source of CH4 emissions from industry in the United States. It is the primary component of natural gas, so CH4 is emitted to the atmosphere during the production, processing, storage, transmission, and distribution of natural gas. Because gas and crude oil commonly exist in the same or adjacent geologic strata, the production, refinement, transportation, and storage of petroleum is a source of CH4 emissions. Domestic livestock (e.g., cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, and camels) produce large amounts of CH4 as part of their normal digestive process (e.g., rumination). In addition, when animal manure is stored, CH4 is produced by anaerobic digestion. Agriculture is the primary source of CH4 emissions. Landfills are the third largest US source of CH4 emissions. Methane is also emitted from natural sources. Wetlands are the largest source, emitting CH4 from bacteria that degrade organic materials in the absence of oxygen. Termites, oceans, sediments, volcanoes, and wildfires are other natural sources of CH4.

Carbon dioxide is the redox mirror image to methane; that is, it is produced from complete oxidation of organic compounds. CO2 is naturally present in the atmosphere as part of the carbon biogeochemical cycle. Human activities are altering the carbon cycle—both by adding more CO2 to the atmosphere and by influencing the ability of natural sinks, like forests, to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. While CO2 emissions come from a variety of natural sources, human-related emissions are responsible for the increase that has occurred in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution.

Why has the preindustrial concentration of N2O changed so little as of 1998 compared with that of methane and carbon dioxide?

Anthropogenic sources have increased at a much higher rate for CH4 and CO2 than for N2O.

What were the sources of perfluoromethane before the industrial revolution? Why has it doubled since then?

This is sort of a trick question, since there is much debate about the sources of CF4 before modern times. The most likely sources are crustal emissions due to weathering, volcanic activity, etc. The very long half-life means that whatever amount is emitted will remain in the atmosphere for tens of thousands of years. This and the additional anthropogenic sources, especially aluminum refining, are the reason for the increase. In an aluminum smelter, alumina is reduced in a reduction cell to form elemental aluminum (Al⁰) and carbon dioxide:

At very high temperatures needed to melt Al (i.e., about 1150 °C), these reduction cells can produce perfluorocarbons (CF4 and C2F6):

What are some of the possible air pollutants that can be released by confined animal feeding operations? What can be done to address them?

The major airborne pollutants from confined feeding operations are various forms of nitrogen. Organic compounds will breakdown ultimately to CO2 in oxidized parts of the system, for example, lagoons, whereas CH4 will be released from reduced environments. The nitrogen can be released in the gas phase as nitric oxide (NO), where oxidation is occurring (known as nitrification), or as ammonia (NH3), in reduced (denitrification) environments, even including waste treatment process; for example, nitrates in water can be aerosolized by aeration of farm lagoons. If lagoons become anaerobic, the sulfur-reducing bacteria (e.g., Desulfovibrio spp.) will release H2S. Other pollutants can be released, for example, pesticides and other farm chemicals. In addition, biological pollutants can be released as or on aerosols into the air from the animal waste (e.g., spores, cysts, bacteria, fungi, and viruses).

1.4.2 Atmospheric pressure

Atmospheric pressure is the force exerted on an object by the weight of the atmosphere above it. It can be visualized as a column atop the object on the earth’s surface, extending all the way to the top of the atmosphere. Atmospheric pressure results from the transfer of momentum by the random motion of air molecules.

Unequal (differential) heating of the earth’s surface makes the air move because of temperature and pressure differences. The laws of potentialities state that movement is from higher potentials to lower potentials (e.g., height, energy, and pressure).

1.4.3 Standard conditions

Standardization is crucial to good science, since sound and credible science depends on repeatability. Diversity is a wonderful thing in most human enterprises. Variety is the spice of life. However, if each scientist uses a unique method, generalizations are impossible. Science depends on logical progressions. Most commonly, science is deductive, that is, knowledge is inferred from the general to specifics. Scientific laws (the general) dictate the applications (the specific).

Of course, even these laws are subject to change, given enough countervailing evidence, for example, inductive reasoning by a sufficient body of specifics to override outdated scientific principles. Such paradigm shifts come only after much evidence and run into resistance from the status quo [39, 40]. But to make science repeatable, we need standards. Thus, to compare the corpus of air pollution literature and knowledge and to apply meaning to atmospheric research and investigations, we must begin with what air pollution scientists mean by the atmosphere.

The standard atmosphere is unit of pressure. One standard atmosphere (atm) = 101,325 Pa (Pa) = 101.325 kilopascals (kPa) = 1013.25 hectopascals (hPa) = 1013.25 millibars (mb). Air pollution publications use these and other pressure units (e.g., mm Hg). American engineers use a mix of pressure units, depending on the task, for example, designing an air mover, installing a pump, or testing indoor air. Meteorologists not only use atm but also use other units like hPa, inches Hg, and mm Hg. Air pollution texts and manuals may prefer using kPa most often because this unit is commonly used in environmental and engineering literature to express vapor pressure and partial pressures. Some environmental partitioning coefficients include Pa units, for example, Henry’s law coefficients, but the Pa is usually too large to be used in most environmental literature, given the frequently that air pollutants thankfully have low partial pressures and concentrations in the atmosphere. Also, where air pollution precursors are at very high concentrations, for example, a stack or reactor, chemical concentrations may be expressed as in Pa units for a stack test, for example. The key is that secondary data sources useful to air pollution calculations vary in the units used for pressure and other factors, so conversions are often needed.

Standard temperature and pressure (STP) is 273.15 K and 1 atm. It is used to allow for consistent comparisons of results from scientific studies. For many engineering studies and experiments, normal temperature and pressure (NTP) is preferred, because NTP is 293.15 K (20°C), which is closer to room temperature. Studies conducted at different temperatures and pressures need to be adjusted to these standards. For example, if a study was done at 290 K and 1.5 atm, the results must be corrected to 273.15 K and 1 atm for STP. Other factors are particularly important for emissions, especially moisture content and oxygen levels. In stack tests, corrections to STP are a means of ensuring that the amount of any pollutant that can leave a stack is consistently applied to all similar stacks in a jurisdiction. In testing air movers and fans, corrections to NTP allow for consistent comparisons for indoor air studies.

For air pollution studies specifically, NTP is often used. For example, EPA’s standard conditions for air pollution measurements are 20°C and 1 atm.

1.5 Recent trends

Air pollution engineers, scientists, and managers have done a remarkable job in the past half-century. Public health has been the principal driver for assessing and controlling