Receptor source

modeling of particulate
and organic pollutants

Dr. Mukesh Sharma

Professor
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur
 Apportioning the contributions to
monitored Ambient Levels of pollutants
among various sources
 Basic Requirements to Assess Air
Pollution Source/Receptor Relationships
• Understand the chemical and physical
characteristics of air pollutants.

• Understand transport from sources to

receptors.

• Estimate the contribution of each source

to air pollutant concentrations measured
at receptors.
Capabilities
Identification of pollutant contribution
due to several sources

28% - Cement plant

Back calculate
40% - Power plant
impacts due to
specific sources
15% - Diesel engine

17% - Steel plant

Capabilities
Identification of unknown sources

?
Unknown
Known Known

Emission inventory of unknown sources

Basic Data Requirement
Complete speciation of particulate matter
- Physical (size distribution)
- Elements (Heavy metals)
- Inorganic and organic

Cr SO4 SO4 Cr SO4

Cr NH4

NH4
Pb

NH4
Pb
Pb
Basic Data Requirement
Characterization of source emissions
- Physical (size distribution)
- Elements (Heavy metals)
- Inorganic and organic

Maximum possible known sources

Cr SO4
SO4

NH4 Cr
SO4
NH4
NH4

Pb

Pb
Source Models vs. Receptor Models
Known source
emissions Estimated
Source model Ambient
Known concentrations
dispersion
parameters

Some Known
source
characteristics

Known ambient Receptor Estimated

concentrations models source impacts

Some known
dispersion
parameters
Limitations
Receptor models cannot replace the dispersion models for
the following cases

• For future predictions

• No contribution from proposed installations
• Simulations for the change in stack flue gas
parameters
• Stack height determination
• Source contribution to formation of secondary
aerosols such as sulfate etc.
Source Models vs. Receptor Models
Dispersion models Receptor models
• Predictions of future air • Fugitive emission impacts
quality • Analysis of actual and worst case
• Analysis of alternative control impacts
strategies • Identification of new sources
• Identification of secondary • Also suitable for complex terrain
aerosols and meteorology
• Impact predictions with • Regional scale air quality impacts
change stack height and flue
gas parameters
• Identification from single,
group source with similar
characteristics
Definitions
Model
– Based on a scientific understanding of
physical interactions.
– A set of mathematical relationships between
variables.
– Values are provided to some variables to
calculate others.
– Input values are obtained from measurements.
– Each model is an imperfect representation of
reality.
Definitions (continued)
Measurement Process:
– Observables measured.
– Range of values of observables.
– Frequency and duration of sampling.
– Spatial density of samples.
– Validity, precision, and accuracy of
measurements.
– Each measurement process is an imperfect
representation of reality.
Source Apportionment Models

• Conceptual model. Describes the relevant

physical and chemical processes in an area. No
mathematics
• Emissions model. Estimates temporal and
spatial emission rates based on activity level,
emission rate per unit of activity, and
meteorology
• Meteorological model. Describes transport,
dispersion, vertical mixing, and moisture in time
and space
Source Apportionment Models
• Air quality model. Estimates concentrations at receptors
based on emissions, transport, and transformation
• Chemical model. Describes transformation of gases to
particles and equilibrium between gas and particle
phases
• Chemical mass balance receptor model. Infers source
contributions from chemical fingerprints of source
emissions and receptor concentrations
• Multivariate receptor models. Infer source profiles from
ambient data
 Source Apportionment Methods

Emission
Source models Receptor models
inventory models

Dispersion
Micro scale
models
analysis

Microscopic methods
Chemical methods
Physical methods
 Receptor models

Microscopy
techniques Chemical

Technique
Measurement of particle size, shape, light scattering properties
Compare with reference library for known emission sources
Disadvantages
Limited to particle size
Operator skill/Bias
Very costly and needs large sample size
Source Apportionment Models - Chemical Methods
Method Advantages Disadvantages
Enrichment factor Provides evidence of source Semi-quantitative method,
impact by change in aerosol requires source
composition composition data
Time series analysis Provides clues to sources Does not provide specific
source impact
Chemical mass Quantitative estimates based on Source composition shall
balance real time data, impact be known and chemical
uncertainties non descriptive sources
cannot be evaluated
Multivariate analysis No prior knowledge of sources is Large data sets are
required. Composition needed to required
identify sources by common
names

Widely Used by USEPA

Basic Steps in Receptor modeling

• Measure PM at maximum possible

locations in the study area
• Speciation of PM samples for
Inorganic/ Organic/Elemental carbon

• Source characterization (library)

Source Composition

Each source may possess unique

• Chemical composition or
• Size distributed species
• Unique tracer compound Finger prints
 >10

7.2-10
7.2-3.0
3.0-1.5
1.5-0.95
0.95-0.45
0.45-0.25
<0.25

Each fraction subjected to chemical analysis

Particle Size – A Key Indicator

100
Weight fraction of total sample (%)

10
A: Soil

1 B: Wood combustion
A B C D E C: Auto exhaust
0.1 D: Fuel oil combustion
E: Coal fly ash
0.01

<1 1 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 16 > 16

Source: USEPA, Emission Factors Guide Book

Heavy Metals in Fuels Source: Robert E. Lee, USEPA, JAPCA, 1973

Element 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000

Al
Co
Cr
Cu
Coal
Fe
Mn
Sb
Se
Ti

Element 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000

Al
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Mn
Fuel oil
Sb
Ni
V
Distribution of Species – Size Fractions
Fly Ash Samples from 150 power stations in USA
100000

10000

1000
PPM (m/m)

100

10

1
Al B Be Cd Cr Cu Fe Mn Ni Pb V

Handout - 1.5 1.5 to 3.5 3.5 to 10 Microns

Source: USEPA, 1984
Signature Compounds

100000
Concentration (ppm)

10000

1000

100

10

1
Cr Cd Cr Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni Pb Sn Sr Ti Zn V Be Sb Al B

Coalfired Cement plant Steel

Source: Robert E. Lee, USEPA, JAPCA, 1973

Signature Compounds

Source Indicator Size Fraction

Motor vehicles Pb, Br Fine
Soil and road dust Si, Al Coarse
Fuel oil combustion Ni, V Fine
Limestone cement Ca Coarse
Paint and pigment Ti/Fe <0.3 Fine
Diesel emissions Ba/Pb Fine
Marine aerosols Na, Cl Coarse
Fly ash Se, As Total
Basic Models
J
Source Models Cik = a D
j =1
ij jk E jk

Cik = Concentration of component “i” in the “k” sample

aij = Fraction amount of component “I” in source “j”
Djk = Dispersion parameter for source “j”
Ejk = Total emission rate of all components from source “J”

Assumptions:
•Composition of source emissions are constant
•Components do not under go any reaction I.e add linearly
•Pollutant identified sources contribute to the receptor
Basic Models
j
Receptor Models Cik = a S
j =1
ij jk for i = 1, n

Cik = Concentration of component “i” in the “k” sample

aij = Fractional amount of component “i” in source “j”
Sjk = Total contribution from source “J”
n = Total number of components measured

Assumptions:
•Number of sources “j” is less than or equal to number of components “I”
•The composition of all sources is linearly independent of each other
 Cement Power DG sets Vehicles

Pb C Al SO4 Mn Cr

Measure signature species both in air and source emissions

Receptor concentrations
Example
Weight Fraction of source composition
Steel Cement Vehicle Soil
Fe 57 0.38 0.1 4.7
Al 0.7 2.4 0 8
Pb 0 0 14.8 0.002
Ca 1.2 30.2 0 2.21

Ambient Particulate Matter concentration: 33.4 ug/m3

Concentration of “Fe” = 0.015 ug/m3
“Al” = 0.074 ug/m3
“Pb” = 0.660 ug/m3
“Ca” = 0.100 ug/m3
Handout
 CFe = FFe*ESteel + FFe *ECement + FFe *EVehicle + FFe *Esoil
CAl = FAL*ESteel + FAL ECement + FAL *EVehicle + FAL *Esoi
Cpb = Fpb*ESteel + Fpb *ECement + Fpb *EVehicle + Fpb *ESoil
CCa = FCa*ESteel + FCa *ECement + FCa *EVehicle + FCa *ESoil

Solving the simultaneous equations for “E”

Number of target Elements should be not less than number of sources
 Aluminum Calcium
0% 5% 0% 19%
32%
0%
Iron Lead

% 49%
100% 95
100%

Vehicular
Steel Plant

Cement Soil
 Comparisons of Measurement:
Source and Receptor Model Components to Reality
on an Urban Scale
Reality Measurement Source Model Receptor Model

Air Volume (m 3) 1011 103 107 103

No. of Variables 103 50 50 50

Range of Pollutant Concentrations (g) 10–15 to 10–3 10–9 to 10–3 10–6 to 10–3 10–9 to 10–3

No. of Variable Interactions 104 0 10 0

No. of Pollutant Sources 103 10 102 10

Range of Pollutant Emissions (g/sec) 10–2 to 103 1 to 103 1 to 103 1 to 103

Emissions Time Scale (sec) 102 107 107 107

Emissions Spatial Scale (m) vert. 10 10 10 10

horiz. 100 100 100 100

Dispersion Time Scale (sec) 102 102 103 104

Dispersion Spatial Scale (m) vert. 0 to 1,000 10, 100 10 10

horiz. 100, micro 1,000 1,000 1,000
104, meso few none none
106, macro few none none

Source: Johan, G. Watson, JAPCA, 1984