Download ppt - Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) Program Philip Martien, Ph.D. Senior Advanced Projects Advisor Bay Area Air Quality Management District CAPCOA Conference

Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE)

ProgramPhilip Martien, Ph.D.

Senior Advanced Projects AdvisorBay Area Air Quality Management District

CAPCOA ConferenceHealth Impacts of Air Pollution on Communities

September 19-20, 2007

September 19-20, 2007 CAPCOA Conference 2

BAAQMD Background• Regional Air Pollution

Control Agency• Programs to reduce

regional smog and particulate matter (PM)

• Wood-smoke reduction programs

• Climate protection program

• Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program


CARE Program Objectives• Evaluate regional and

community cancer and non-cancer health risk from ambient toxic air contaminants (TAC)

• Focus health risk mitigation measures on locations with higher risk levels and sensitive populations


From Emissions of Toxic Air Contaminants to Health

Effects

Chronicle/Kurt Rogers

Emissions Concentrations Exposure Health Effects


CARE Program: A Three Phase Design

Spring ’04 Fall ’06 Summer ’08 Fall ’09


CARE Task Force

• 15 members represent government agencies, businesses, health professionals, and community groups

• Provide feedback to District staff on CARE program

• Conduct expert review of work products

• Represent community perspective


Phase I: Develop TAC Emissions Estimates

• Preliminary TAC emission inventory– Quantify emissions totals

– Map emissions within the Bay Area

• Evaluate and improve TAC inventory– Several rounds of critical review

– Improvements to on-road diesel emissions

– Evaluation of emissions using observations

• Demographic & health data

• Target areas for grant funding


Cancer Toxicity-Weighted Emissions

By Pollutant

Diesel Particulates

81%

Chromium (hexavalent)

4%

Formaldehyde1%

Benzene5%

Other3%

1,3-Butadiene6%

Construction Equipment

34%

Ships6%

Farm Equipment

4%

Construction & Demolition

3%

Aircraft2%

Recreational Boats1%

Locomotives2%

Other6%

Onroad Mobile

Sources32%

Industrial Fuel Consumption

1%

Industrial & Commercial Equipment

9%

By Source Category


Chronic, Non-Cancer Toxicity-Weighted

EmissionsBy Pollutant

Acrolein48%

Formaldehyde20%

Cadmium1%

Benzene1%

Butyl cellosolve

1%

Acetaldehyde3%

Manganese4%

Arsenic2%

Nickel1% Other

5%

Diesel Particulates

14%

Aircraft24%

Onroad Mobile

Sources33%

Construction & Mining Equipment

9%

Lawn & Garden

Equipment6%


Industrial & Commercial Equipment

4%

Ships1%

Paved Road Dust2%

Residential Fuel

Combustion 2%

Solvent Evaporation

3%

Construction & Demolition

3%

Other9%

By Source Category


Acute Toxicity-Weighted Emissions

By Pollutant By Source Category

Formaldehyde4.0%

Other0.2%

Nickel0.1%

Benzene0.2%Arsenic

1.5%

Acrolein94.0%

Lawn & Garden

Equipment9%


Other7%

Onroad Mobile

Sources38%

Aircraft40%


Comparison to Ambient

Measurements

• BAAQMD lab (15 sites) and CARB lab (5 sites)

• Measurements made on a 1-in-12 day schedule

• Data for 1999-2001 used• Quarterly averaged annual

averages


Ambient VOC Toxic Concentrations vs. Emissions:

Livermore siteTotal

EmissionsAmbient

Concentrations


Percent Overlap Between Ambient Concentrations and Emissions

VOCs, excluding three compounds frequently below detection limits

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Vallejo

Santa Rosa

San Rafael

San Leandro

San Jose

San Francisco

Richmond - 7th St

Redwood City

Oakland-Davie

Napa

Livermore

Fremont

Fort Cronkite

Crockett

Concord

Bethel Island

ARB

BAAQMD


Cancer Risk Comparison

• Comparing fractions of lifetime cancer risk from various toxic compounds

• VOCs, chromium VI, diesel PM– need to estimate diesel concentrations– used elemental carbon measurements

(IMPROVE method) to estimate diesel PM

• ARB measurements used– they include formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and

chromium VI– 1,3-butadiene better estimated


Cancer Risk: Emissions vs. Ambient: San Jose site

Total Emissions

Ambient Concentrations


• Good agreement between emissions fractions and ambient concentrations

• Good agreement between risk components based on emissions vs. ambient concentrations– Risk from diesel PM greatest, followed by benzene and

1,3-butadiene– Risk overlap from 79% to 92%

• Emissions inventory diesel risk greater than ambient

• Might be a problem with the area source inventory, perhaps construction equipment

Comparison Summary


Emissions Spatial DistributionDiesel Particulate

MatterAcrolein


Demographic & Health DataPopulation under 18 Asthma Hospitalization

Rates


Phase I Findings – Risks from Emitted Pollutants

• About 80% of the emissions weighted by cancer risk are from diesel PM

• About 50% of the emissions weighted by chronic non-cancer risk are from acrolein

• More than 90% of the acute non-cancer risk is also from acrolein

• There are uncertainties associated with the determination of risk


Phase I Findings - Sources• On-road and off-road diesel emissions–

including trucks, construction, shipping, rail–are large sources of cancer risk

• Gasoline powered vehicles and aircraft are large contributors to non-cancer risk

• The highest densities of diesel PM and acrolein are in eastern S.F. and western Alameda & Contra Costa counties

• These areas also have large numbers of sensitive people


Mitigation Approaches • Target appropriate mitigation measures to

areas with high TAC emissions and sensitive populations– Focus grant and incentive funding for reducing

mobile-source emissions in target areas

– Enhance information campaigns

– Form local partnerships on issues related to development, housing, and transportation to reduce risk

– Develop model ordinances

– Regulate emissions from stationary and indirect sources

– Support & sponsor legislation


Next Steps Phase II: Modeling Concentrations

and Continued Mitigation

• Continue to improve emissions estimates– Update to 2005

– Update speciation profiles where possible

• Local & regional modeling– Participate in health risk assessments

• Enhanced measurements

• Additional mitigation measures


West Oakland Health Risk Assessment

• Local-scale modeling with CALPUFF (diesel PM) • 100 km x 100 km receptor domain• Three-part source domain

Land sourcesPart 1: Port of OaklandPart 2: Union Pacific Rail YardPart 3: West Oakland

Water sources


Supplemental TAC Measurements

• EPA local-scale air toxics ambient monitoring grant

• Increase density of air quality measurements in West Oakland via “saturation monitoring” – Characterize local-scale pollutant concentrations– Identify “hot spots” – Characterize concentration gradients

• Time integrated and continuous monitoring• Mobile monitoring


Additional Mitigation Measures

• Propose new regulations and modify existing regulations– Green Ports Initiative – Other stationary sources

• Focus grant and incentive funding in areas with high emissions and/or sensitive populations– Carl Moyer Grants

– Transportation Fund for Clean Air Grants

• Develop guidance for cities, counties, and other public agencies to incorporate in general plans, municipal codes, or other local plans/programs


• Air District Staff: David Fairley, Cuong Tran, Amir Fanai, Eric Stevenson

• Sonoma Technology Inc.: Steve Reid

• Desert Research Institute: Eric Fujita

• California Air Resources Board: Dan Donohoue

Acknowledgments


Contact Information

• http://www.baaqmd.gov/CARE

• Phil Martien: [email protected]